Very positive response! It sounds like you don’t think there is any truth to what he is saying. That seems interesting given that he is not the only one saying it.
The only thing I'm saying is that it is not correct to generalize, giving myself as an example for someone who haven't experienced anything similar.
I've no idea how you reached that conclusion given that the comment you're replying to says
>> I'm sorry he had such experience and I'm not saying he does not have the right to be upset. He knows the best what he went through and how he feels.
Indeed he goes on to make this clear: “The only thing I'm saying is that it is not correct to generalize”
This invalidates everything about Jeff’s piece except for his feelings, since the entire piece is an argument that there is a systematic problem with the team that other people have experienced too. There are tweets and quotes to support this.
Jeff does generalize, and he does reference other people who had similar experiences. Jeff’s entire reason for writing the piece is to generalize. He doesn’t say ‘I’m sure this is just me’. He argues quite the opposite.
If it is ‘not correct to generalize’ - as Mgechev says, then Jeff must be wrong about there being a problem with the team, therefore Mgechev does not believe Jeff.
You’ll notice that Mgechev repeats this ‘not correct to generalize’ here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25072705
Mgechev also says they “can't relate to his experience”. They also make no reference to (or validate) any of the other people who apparently had similar experiences or views of the team.
It’s pretty reasonable to conclude that Mgechev doesn’t think there is a problem with the team and wants to convey that to us.
Here are the tactics you have used so far:
1. Narrow definition.
2. Ignoring context.
3. Gaslighting.
4. Personal attacks.
This is the other side of the coin from Mgchev‘s comment.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/generalize
It has nothing to do with ‘applying to all’
It means ‘to draw a general conclusion’.
Mgechev is telling us not to draw a conclusion from Jeff’s piece.
It is completely reasonable to assume that Mgechev doesn’t believe Jeff’s conclusions, and is asking us not to either.
> Mgechev is telling us not to draw a conclusion from Jeff’s piece.
You're really going to pull out a dictionary on me, then blatantly ignore the emphasized word in your chosen definition that is exactly the word that makes my statement true?
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/general
> general: involving, relating to, or applicable to every member of a class, kind, or group
2. Exactly one out of the 7 definitions on the page you list supports your position.
3. The top definition on the page you linked is consistent with the meaning I am using.
4. Saying the definition you have chosen is my chosen definition is a misrepresentation.
Therefore: You are the one selecting a narrow definition to suit your purposes.