Hacker News Reader

Comment by mr_gibbins | Hacker News Reader

It's fine to offend in some contexts, but the author sounds like a douche. He wouldn't like it much if another researcher wrote an article taking a massive dump on his work, would he? It's basic manners.

Don't say the authors are wrong. Say they take a 'singular view'. Or 'it is arguable that...'. Or 'their results contradict X'. It's fine to critique, but no need to be an ass about it.

As for the seminar - most definitely the fault of the faculty. Anyone should be able to attend a seminar. The clue is in the entymology - 'university' = 'universal'.

View on HN

The author make it sound like his first issue was some super-subtle academic social detail.

But he was simply being personally abusive to people! Building up a long, sarcastic, mocking rant, going so far as to call people names. I'd be motified if someone addressed me like this.

Of course people objected to it! They would to in any industry or social situation!

> never criticize

You can criticize, just not be abusive and mocking!

It seems the writing that he was referring to is this: https://billwadge.wordpress.com/2020/02/06/honest-wes-just-f...

I'm not really seeing where that could have been offensive. Its easy to disagree with, of course, but was it attacking anyone?

> no need to be an ass about it

I disagree. Sometimes people used to everyone walking eggshells around them need a jolt of assholishness.

Perhaps, but being the decider about who does and who doesn’t deserve some assholishness is the heart of what an asshole is. Someone who disregards the wishes and feelings of another. Like if you said you like asparagus and I said “you should like broccoli, it’s better”, if we weren’t buddies like you that and I wasn’t your nutritionist :).

This is true, but it comes at the cost of diminished influence for the person doing the assholery.

Saying that some people need to be subjected to abuse is a terrible point of view.

Abuse is a heavily loaded word, and as an aside, I hate the cheapening of language in modern times. Assault is another that's getting cheapened. Someone bluntly telling another "you're dead wrong" isn't abuse IMO.

But to your main point, I've seen my share of the polite leading the polite. If there is a general level of competence, fine, work can still proceed. But often, workplaces need an asshole who will voice their opinion in blunt language. There are moments when diplomacy causes, at best, avoidable delays, but at worst completely fucked projects.

There is massive difference between "you are wrong" and mocking someone. Both deserve different response - when someone mocks you it is perfectly ok to mock back or ignore that person. Which is what people do. Mocking makes you asshole.

Workplaces don't need assholes. People who reasinably criticise are not assholes.

Bluntness is considered rude in most societies I'm familiar with. Not good either.

As another aside, I feel this is the problem with downvoting. It is a blunt criticism in a society where criticism must be delivered cautiously to avoid offense.

If you are talking about "pathetic inadequacy of the contributions" then the contributions better really be inadequate and pathetic. Only then it is bluntness or "telling it like it is".

And most often, those contributions were normal or even state of art when they have been made - making accusation not so much blunt. Instead, it is appeal to emotions, an attempt to leverage funy sounding expression for own goal.

And it is only fair when people respond to it in kind.

I disagree.

First you calling being blunt abuse.

Second your thinking a terrible point of view that some people should be subjected to abuse. Some people should be physically abused. Joshua Milton Blahyi, David Parker Ray, Rodrigo Duterte are good examples.

Often the only power you have is your speech. If people are offended when shown how shitty they are, it's on them. Stop coddling real abusers under the cover of professionalism or political correctness.

> Some people should be physically abused.

I think that's completely morally wrong. The only exception is if someone else is physically at risk and you are protecting them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com