On: Senators seek crackdown on "Bitcoin" currency

[bxr]

>which I'm not sure you fully understand.

Ah, condescension, now that is a perfect example of a typical HN comment.

[tptacek → bxr]

Is he wrong? How is he wrong?

[cromulent → tptacek]

I don't think bxr is saying that hugh3 is wrong. He's saying that he is being condescending (although I'm not so sure this is typical). I guess hugh3 could have just said "Nonsensical accusation" and his point that it was "pretty much a perfect example of a bad HN comment" might have been even stronger without speculation on shareme's level of understanding of derivative trading.

[tptacek → cromulent]

Sure, but 'hugh3 didn't write that comment to be mean. He's making an example out of something that really is an example of one of the archetypical thread-disrupting issue-forking politics-inducing conspiracy-theoretic superficial toxic comments. That's what I see there. You can obviously disagree.

[cromulent → tptacek]

I actually think we are in agreement.

[Helianthus → bxr]

Ah, the snide counter to condescension, &etc.

[mustpax → Helianthus]

Let me add some nitpicking to complete the obnoxious HN trifecta. The proper ortographic representation of etc is &c. In fact, that's where the ampersand comes from (think ligature form of Et).

[Helianthus → mustpax]

I appreciated this, actually. It's funny how just being in a negative tree gets you downvoted by association--good thing it's just karma, eh?

[mustpax → Helianthus]

To be fair, it's less that we're in a negative tree and more that we're not adding value to the discussion.

[Helianthus → mustpax]

Yeah, but I didn't expect people to take it so _personally._

(Or maybe I do, but I unconsciously resent how serious we are and fight it by taking a few downvotes every so often.)