Hacker News Reader

Comment by seabee | Hacker News Reader

People can get angry over something that another person would think nothing of. Even something as simple as throwing away a half-eaten candy bar. Just because a man is brought up to do something wrong, it does not absolve him of the fact it is wrong.

That 'innocuous' comment has enough social subtext for people of certain viewpoints to find it repulsive. Like, say, a guy running an anti-bribery campaign.

Personally, I don't begrudge people paying more to get better service/food, but extravagant tipping for better service in a situation where people are expecting to be served fairly sends a strong signal: "I am too good for your rules."

Not everyone has the same outlook on life as you do.

View on HN

We can play this game all the way down to the most impoverished society on the planet. A poor Indian could find it reprehensible that a middle class American will throw away a candy bar. A starving African could find it reprehensible that a poor Indian will use comparatively expensive spices in his food. After all, why not eat the most tasteless food possible and then donate the extra money? The point is, unless you are from the most impoverished society on the planet, you are doing something that someone somewhere could find reprehensible because of social subtext.

The question needs to be asked, where does this game get us? Nowhere. All good people are ultimately batting for the same team. Sure, truly evil people should be named and shamed, but that's not what happened in this thread. Guelo picked a fight because he thought he had the right to, and he doesn't. At least, not with Leelin. Hateful dialogue has absolutely zero positive benefit and often hurts the person doing the hating: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2067014.

> The point is, unless you are from the most impoverished society on the planet, you are doing something that someone somewhere could find reprehensible because of social subtext.

When you see a liberal with hunched shoulders, it is because this issue is bearing heavily on their mind. /s

You're right, of course. Selling all your possessions to donate the proceeds to a poor family only gets you so far, and then only in the short term. The real goal is battling for systemic change, either by fixing the system or boosting the economy to give more people more wealth. Infighting because you disagree on a 0.1%, that doesn't help at all, and is why passion needs a little control from time to time...

Well said.

>Selling all your possessions to donate the proceeds to a poor family only gets you so far

Actually, done well, it goes quite far. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-11950843

I still agree with your sentiments, of course.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com