Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Your comment is interesting because it shows the dilemma posed to those of us who struggle to communicate positive intentions without unintentionally upsetting people.

On the one hand, there are people who would be offended by a reply of “s/wizen/wisen” _because_ they feel it’s low-effort, nitpicking, and/or talking over their heads (not everyone would even understand that comment, even on HN).

On the other hand, there’s many people like yourself and many commenters on the original article who feel that “padded” criticism is condescending.

The dilemma is that both the “Stick to the facts” group and the group who feels that “just the facts” is rude — feel strongly that they are right and everyone else should know that.

At least you’re willing to assess the intentions of the speaker rather than attacking. Unfortunately, not everyone will do that.

Perhaps the real takeaway is: there are no hard and fast rules when it comes to interacting with people.




> there are no hard and fast rules when it comes to interacting with people.

I think there is one, actually, which is: be consistent. At least then, those who interact with you regularly can learn your style and calibrate accordingly. Even on forums, you can look to one's commenting history to calibrate your reading of a comment with no other context. I've certainly done this, on occasions when some comment deviated significantly from the norm of polite discourse, usually to find that the commenter simply has a different norm than I expect.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: