Yikes, you can't attack another user like that on HN, no matter how wrong they are or you feel they are. We have to ban accounts that do this, so please don't do it again.
(I'm not endorsing the parent comment either, but you can't be aggressive like this here, and you've been doing it in more than one place, which is not cool.)
Who are you preventing from replying to those attacking them?
Are you hiding behind your "algorithms"? Who sets those algorithms, people with compassion?
Look at the organization you are "just following orders" for. Your organization is facilitating the Trumpization of America, with its ignorance and promotion of oppression and environmental destruction. And, behind it all, is a sole concern for money, period.
And now PG has come out as a full-blown ignoramus. I guess that's ok for you so long as those checks clear, huh?
You could be positively affecting the world by helping me teach compassion, but there's no class on compassion in the MBA curriculum, and that's the only Bible an YC company can preach, right?
We are all choosing sides, every day, Dan. Don't follow the losers of the world in their selfish, apathetic, and callous worship of money, my friend.
I guess Nazis can just post whatever they want as long as they couch their views in the proper verbiage, huh? There is no civil discourse with Nazis, Dan. There is no tolerating the intolerant; that's a destructive policy. Take a stand for what is right, or stand on the side of the losers. There is no other path.
Now we know why PG has set the algorithms the way y'all have. His loser mentality has enshittified this place, and all his good soldiers have followed in lock-step, haven't you?
I'm defending this site for its intended purpose. That's all.
If you keep breaking the site guidelines, we're going to have to ban you—not because we disagree with your views (I don't track those, nor care what they are) but because you're repeatedly and egregiously breaking the rules.
> I'm defending this site for its intended purpose. That's all.
You could be a positive force for the world, Dan, if you chose to be, but that would require you to become more compassionate and maybe even work for an organization that considers compassion as a motivating force.
> but because you're repeatedly and egregiously breaking the rules.
Thanks for the warning; it's the first anyone's ever told me that I've been a bad boy around here, to my recollection. I've certainly seen many bad folks coming my way, that's for sure.
I'll try to be better, if I continue to hang around here.
> (I don't track those, nor care what they are)
You should, Dan. Traverse my comments, from the first to the last, for all I want is for you and all our fellow human beings to be happy, and I have endeavored to teach all who read my comments how to achieve such happiness.
Remember that PG would've never hired you if you cared about compassion; it almost certainly wasn't a part of your interview questionnaire. He hired you to tow the company line. It is REALLY important which company lines we are towing in this life, Dan. Your inner peace and happiness depends upon it.
I am at your service. I love you, and may peace be with you.
I don't think Boards of Directors and C-Suites of massive, publicly-traded companies operate based on empathy. They pattern-match cultural trends to maximize shareholder value. To assert otherwise is laughably naïve.
My comment suggests that I think introducing inflammatory political issues into the work environment, issues that have a "correct" answer as far as your boss's boss's bosses are concerned, is unethical, corrosive, and counterproductive.
Beyond that, you know virtually nothing about me. But by all means, continue in your presumptions. Let's further accelerate the breakdown of civil discourse, perhaps that's the only way to eventually get back to something approaching respect for differing opinions, no matter how assertively stated.
The problem is that it's a performance. You know who else cries convincingly without meaning it? Actors in movies. Wokeism has equated performance to action. Pretend you care, make it public, and the problem somehow goes away. If you truly care about solving problems, that position basically guarantees that nothing will change.
You can pretend whatever you want, for whatever reason, to justify whatever ideals, attitudes, and behaviors your culture has inculcated in you and you cling to so intensely.
Only compassion can set you free, but it's your human right to choose otherwise. But it's also your responsibility and your responsibility alone as to what you reap from those seeds you've sown like so many butterflies' wingbeats into their effects upon your karma.
Yes, you are. Without compassion or happiness, crying on the internet about people who have empathy.
You can add pathetic to your understanding of yourself, that is, if you had any self-reflective ability, which you obviously don't.