One example of hearsay from someone somebody on a message board knows is not evidence, and it doesn't change my point: If people are talking about Github, they probably are white.
Would you please stop posting in the flamewar style to HN? You've done it a lot, and it's not what this site is for. This thread may not be great but your comments are standing out as more flamey than the rest. This is the opposite of how we want comments to go here.
what name did I call someone? I strive to specifically not use ad hominem-type insults when discussing things, and I don't see it here?
should I just stop posting any thoughts I have that run contrary to the general sphere of accepted thought here? should I take downvotes to mean "we don't want to hear what you have to say"? if I post something that others find disagreeable and reply to it saying as such, should I just abstain from responding?
The word "disgusting" at the end of the flamebait sentence in your GP comment counts as calling names in the sense that the HN guidelines use the term: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
You don't have to stop posting contrary thoughts, but you definitely have to stop posting flamebait. Teasing those two things apart isn't always easy, especially when the nervous system is running high with strong feelings (I'm not talking about you, but about all of us). Those sort of comments are not what HN is for, regardless of how conformist or contrarian they are. What we want is curious conversation. If you can comment from that place, then it's fine, and as a bonus, your comments will be more likely to engage curiosity in others. It all requires a much lighter touch.
I see, thank you. I believe I understand, finally (including retroactively for recent posts). the only thing I'm fuzzy on is where the line of "flamebait" is drawn. was this whole thread flamebait, or just my flagged post specifically?
if someone is advocating for changing language for everyone to protect the feelings of $MINORITY, without actually knowing any $MINORITY that objects to said language (or being one themselves), then disregards anecdotal instances of $MINORITY not objecting to said language, then the result is a belief that you know what changes to society should be made on behalf of $MINORITY, thus infantilizing them, portraying them as someone who can't speak up for themselves and portraying yourself as someone who knows better than $MINORITY what is best for $MINORITY.
