Hacker News Reader

Comment by defterGoose | Hacker News Reader

Intent and good-faith argument also matter. If you're not willing to look past another person's inexpert use of grammar and/or syntax in order to understand their meaning, then you're doing it wrong. No trophies for elevating language to be a rigid and immutable thing.

View on HN

From a purely practical perspective, if you're trying to convey an idea the onus is kinda on you to communicate it clearly. If the literal meaning of what you're saying ('defund the police') is not actually what you're trying to convey, it seems unproductive to accuse people of acting in 'bad faith' when they understandably misunderstand. It's like designing something badly and then blaming your users for 'not using it right'.

Sure, I absolutely take your point and as a lover of language generally feel similar leanings. But by the same token, everyone seems to be everyone else's audience these days, so there must be some reciprocal onus on an audience member to realize that a person calling to "defund the police" in Minneapolis might not agree with the statement "law enforcement is universally bad".

If someone says “vote for me, I want to defund the police”, I’m not sure what to believe. Do they support a terrible policy (defunding the police)? Or are they lying? If they actually get in to power and actually do defund the local police, I don't think we get to complain about the outcome.

It might be an ASD trait, but I really like to take people at their word. Please speak what you actually think. I have a hard time trusting people who say one thing while they believe the opposite. Especially in politics.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com