Hacker News Reader

Comment by anigbrowl | Hacker News Reader

'Fuck Monsanto, and by association, fuck Cloudant' is not a constructive opening to a conversation. If that poster had started by saying 'This announcement makes me not want to do business with Cloudant. Here's why...' then I'd largely agree with you. You are right that Monsanto is a politically radioactive company, so putting out a cheery press release about becoming a core technology supplier displays a misunderstanding of branding.

However, raving and swearing at people is not persuasive, it's bullying. We'll never find out what pg really thinks of Monsanto or the idea of doing business with them, because all we've got is his understandably snippy reaction to what sounds like the aggressive ranting of an insane person.

View on HN

You are absolutely right. Having known my comment was going to be so popular, I would've offered a more civil and productive opening to the discussion. Realistically though, I saw my comment being downvoted into oblivion. I was ok with that. And I'm still ok with my comment, because "fuck you" is probably how I'd start any discussion with a member of Monsanto. I don't think that makes me insane (or dumb according to PG).

Its unfortunate though that my comments distracted from the real issue.

But then again, perhaps all of this discussion wouldn't have happened without my comments. Controversy can be fickle.

Well, good on you for saying so. I don't think your opinions are insane - I don't fully share them but certainly understand your reasons for disliking Monsanto. I'm just not a fan of the shouting match as a conversational style.

I didn't write the original comment being referred to but I reserve the right to drop the F bomb where appropriate.

This is real life, we're adults, and it is possible to communicate and deliver an astute/sophisticated/poignant perspective using expletives (just as much as it isn't). If you're offended by someone writing 'fuck' then you need to grow some testicular fortitude.

swearing is not equal to the 'aggressive ranting of an insane person' - that's ridiculous.

I'm not offended by the use of the word 'fuck.' I'm offended by the idea that throwing a tantrum is a reasonable or credible way to open a conversation. It's one thing to get passionate if the other party is being pointlessly confrontational or dismissive of genuine concerns. It might even be appropriate. It's quite another for someone to lead off with a shouty denunciation as if that person's opinion is the only one that matters and has no need of explanation.

Step back from the swearing and look at the context in which it cropped up. When an unfamiliar someone's entry to a conversation consists of blowing his/her top, it's usually because they're drunk or crazy. As William Burroughs used to say, 'I am not paid to listen to this drivel.'

I refuse to grow some fucking testicular fortitude and resent your implication that fortitude is masculine ;)

Ya, it seems to me that pg was talking more about the tone/type of comment and HN then anything else.

Maybe. But in his own words:

"The reason this comment thread is a worrying sign for HN is that you didn't use to have to think like a PR person here."

Point of order: he didn't "rave and swear at people".

He raved and sweared at a gigantic corporation. Let's not get sloppy.

And at a little startup.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com