He's just misguided as to the reason he's being downvoted. In fact, it's absurd to say "HN needs everything to be easily digested" when the site in discussion is being upvoted by the same HN users.
Am I? Is it? I thought the characterization of people wanting an answer, not to be told to expand their mind, especially with something ambiguous was pretty accurate. That and a smaller number of people misinterpreting hostile intent.
I don't think it contradicts people also upvoting the submission. People like it, but don't want to be told they have to work for their own opinion on it. People come to comments expecting to get an opinion, not be told, "sorry, you're on your own with this one." Go back and read the comments I wrote here, maybe you'll learn something.
In addition, I do think engineers don't like having "what they don't know" pointed out to them, because they're job requires them to have answers. And I think they are willing to misinterpret that as hostile because of the shame they feel at not knowing something. It's just inaccurate projection. But in many other areas, ambiguity, openness and not having the answers are like good things.
I think people in hard tech can have more of that, that's all, bro.
> a smaller number of people misinterpreting hostile intent.
Yeah, I don't think it's smaller. Not hostile intent per se, but still an harsh tone for what's essentially an innocuous question. Had you wrote the same comment with a more sympathetic/didactic tone, rather than accusatory, I'd bet you you'd get upvotes instead.
> Go back and read the comments I wrote here, maybe you'll learn something.
See, this is another example. There's no other way to read this but as calling me a total ignorant, which would be disrespectful even if coming from someone I readily acknowledged as being much more knowledgeable than me.
> In addition, I do think engineers don't like having "what they don't know" pointed out to them, because they're job requires them to have answers. And I think they are willing to misinterpret that as hostile because of the shame they feel at not knowing something.
Again, there's nothing accusatory about it. Stop moving the goal posts. People didn't like it. Instead of blaming me, and pretending "Cris wrote something bad", they need to face how they felt about it.
But to learn more about what you mean, how would you rewrite that in a way that sounds sympathetic/didactic to you?
In addition, what's wrong with suggesting you read the comments I just wrote? Maybe you'll learn something is not saying you are ignorant at all. Just saying I have something to offer that maybe you didn't think of. I think that's a totally valid and healthy way to think about my own contribution. If I wanted to call you an ignorant idiot, I just would have said it. So... I think that's you totally misinterpreting based on, probably, precisely the triggering issue I identify with eng culture. So thanks for proving my point. Because what's wrong with learning something? That's a good thing. Learning is a strength. Admitting "I don't know" is a pre-requisite, and acknowledging, "heck, someone else probably does know" is a corollary.
It's a theory about engineers but it fits a lot of the data I see. It's not a matter of being convinced otherwise, because it's not binary. There's not only one truth. It can be true for some people and not true for others. I think it's a useful theory that highlights how an aspect of the job/predilection affects/correlates with people socially. I'm comfortable believing it and also not believing every person with engineering skills needs to be like that.
I think your interpretation of bad intent is based on an overly inflexible reading of what my response to that question. It sounds like you want to find something bad there. It's not that hard to "presume good faith" and work to find that, rather than (as it looks like you did here) doubling down trying to "prove" I'm somehow doing something wrong.
Anyway, have a good one. Hopefully this was instructive somehow, if you're flexible enough to hear it. Just a different point of view, doesn't have to threaten your world view, just can be "something in addition" you add to your own perspective. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Calmly relating my perspective is not bickering. It's not even meta, because I was directly addressing what's written.
Maybe some people are not happy with it, but you don't have to be the instrument of their will. I think you should have stood up for me when people accuse my original comment of being hostile when it wasn't, and the only thing hostile was reading it as hostile, and calling it pompous. How is that not obvious? But you let that slide....
I'm going to stand up for myself. Probably more so if I don't see anyone else doing it. If someone says something inaccurate, or gives something mean, I'll push back. What's the big deal? If you're going to disallow people to stand up for themselves, then you have to do it. And at least be even handed and disallow the ancestor comments. You gotta be fair otherwise it seems arbitrary, clawing and mean spirited. Hope you get it :)
Thanks. It brings a smile to my face how discussion forums take themselves so seriously, thinking they're all about robust discussion, but go batshit crazy on some dissenting points. I mean, this wasn't even flame war. I think a lot of it is about the medium, not the message. If you had a room of people, and I said that, maybe some engineer would have grumpily harrumphed and rolled their eyes, but I don't think it would have become a hate-fest or shouting match.
Think before you type, I guess. I do enjoy needling that narrow-mindedness like this tho, I think optimizing a little more for openness to experience is a good thing in the eng world.
