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

I think this kind of cynicism without citation is a very unhealthy thing for any (online) community.

large edit: I should have said "cynicism without citation and qualification." Even if there's a citation I don't like how people reject people/places/institutions out of hand because they might do bad things or have bad qualities because it's often represented as a dichotomy.

For instance here, even if we grant that the EPA is susceptible to corporate influence, even if we as a society decide to go so far as to find them guilty of all the good they didn't do, it doesn't diminish the good that they did do and can still do, and too often these kinds of rejections/scoffs/cynicisms don't serve to add anything to the conversation of a community (such as HN) other than shut down more concrete or nuanced criticisms or discussions.

Sorry for being way off topic here.

There is a citation of the data. The question is a fair one. I don't think we should self-censor people for answering, per se.[1]

[1] Also see:



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