Comment by mst | Hacker News Reader

Comment by mst | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> If you really wanted people to read the whole thread you would not have shortcircuited the process and replied upstream.

And yet, I explicitly said: this is my (opinionated) summary of the thread that ensued from my sibling comment; if unsure whether I've captured things accurately, please read that whole thread and draw your own conclusions.

You are welcome to claim that my explicit invitation to people - in a situation where, as you say, your last comments are 'hidden away behind "more" button' - is deceptive, but given I was actively encouraging people to read things upstream that would otherwise have been, as you said, 'hidden away', I personally do not consider my actions to have been deceptive in the least.

As for 'civil', it seems to me that this conversation has, in and of itself, made very clear to anybody reading it that you and I have significantly different definitions of that concept, and how to interpret this fact can only be left as an exercise to the reader.

Where was I "un"-civil by your definition and conception of civility? Again, you [mst] are making vague provocations and insinuations and continuing to carry the conversation into a direction that is unproductive and trying to paint me in a poor light. By turning this into a meta-argument you have derailed the original conversation.

I used to just walk away from such conversation but realized I'm letting the bullies win when I do that. By walking away I'm letting sophistry become a viable strategy. We will continue this as long as you want. I am not backing down and will continue to argue my position and provide reasons for what I believe and why.

You have consistently used bad faith and misleading tactics to derail the entire conversation. Every time I have assumed good faith you have thwarted it. Every time I have extended an explanatory provision you have used it against me by quoting me out of context, and then tried to put words in my mouth and pretended to not have done so. Whereas I have taken no such actions and have always quoted you in context.

My actions have been civilized. Yours have been otherwise.

I stand by my choice to invite people to read the entire thread and draw their own conclusions.

In case it wasn't clear I will spell it out. That choice was not what was being contended. It was your behavior of bad faith actions that I was contending. You tried to bias the actual argument and paint me in a certain way by quoting me out of context, which I rightfully called out.

I encourage people to read as well and reach their own conclusions without me putting words in their mouth or biasing their reasoning as you did in your shortcircuit post. Because rational and reasoned argument requires each individual to weigh the evidence and then respond with compelling arguments for refuting or accepting them.

FWIW: there is at least one HNer (me) who has read both subthreads and completely agrees with your assessment of the situation. 'mst is engaging in those time-honored tactics of the online troll - mischaracterise, redirect, disengage. Unfortunately these bad faith discussions are all too common recently and it's sad to see HN swallow the bait.

Even more reason to stand up for what's right. And I appreciate your encouragement. I want more people to act in good faith so I try to model the type of argument I want to see more of through actual actions.

hello! friendly invite to say hi on reddit if you like :) /u/foobanana

I am sorry that you consider genuine attempts to get real answers to be trolling with no explanation as to twhy.

I continue to stand by my choice to invite people to read the entire thread and draw their own conclusions.

Don't apologize. Stop using such tactics. I already pointed out what you did, how you did it, and why it was disingenuous. If you were sincere you would not have quoted me out of context, you would not have tried to bias the group opinion, and you would not have shifted the blame as you are doing now.

You should just stop because you are no longer making any points.

"I am sorry", in this case, was meant in its plain meaning of "I feel sorrow about this being the case".

Not everything is a tactic. Sometimes people just mean what they say.

> I am sorry that you consider genuine attempts to get real answers to be trolling with no explanation as to twhy.

That's called shifting the blame because you're shifting the responsibility and consequences of your actions onto someone else. That is not how one begins an apology. An apology begins as "I am sorry. I will reflect and consider the feedback given and do better next time. Please feel free to give further feedback if you feel like it and I will consider it and improve my behavior".

It wasn't an apology, as I already said in the comment you're responding to.

Not to all people, and not necessarily to the commenter you are responding to.

After clarifying that what I said wasn't an apology memexy continues to criticise me because it didn't fit their standards of apology.

I accept that my phrasing was not entirely clear but given having made what I meant explicit and still being attacked I'm unsure that my mistakes were the primary problem in this case.

As was mentioned in another comment, memexy is in Phase 1 - mischaracterize

Reply on news.ycombinator.com