rdrake98

"The strongest reason I could come up with to wait for it to pass was the pain it would cause my mother."

You got hold of the right reason. And sometimes we need to hold on to that reason - the pain we would cause to others - for dear live. So to speak.

So sorry for the loss you must be feeling. I met and talked to Chris just once, after a talk he gave in London, and found him utterly delightful as well as lucid on all things technical. Blessings and comfort to all who knew and loved him.

That I found less annoying than your previous post. It's infuriating to be told that I'm not interested in actually engaging in a conversation when I'm sure that I am but it's less annoying than the implicatures in the previous one so thanks.

One thing it might be worth mentioning: my commercial experience of the software industry goes back to 1980. It's only with the advent of social media built on the Web that I've ever heard (those assumed to be) programmers express such horrific and hateful things to women. It incredibly bothers me.

Does that give some context for the kinds of things I'd be interested to discuss here?

I'd also still be grateful to know how exactly the OP became [flagged] though, thanks to jessaustin, I can now see it again personally.

Thanks.

On the relevance of the question I saw one right away but I'll leave that until you make clear the various slurs you make do not apply to me here.

So you're interpreting my first three posts on HN as "trying to minimize the source of harassment"? Because that is a lie. If you persist in spreading it I'm likely to give up my embryonic life as a contributor here. I don't think you have any reason to do this to me or the OP, based on what he's written, but I get the idea. Nasty place to make a mark, despite the value I've accrued as lurker for a number of years.

The tentative interpretation of the OP makes the evil of the attack even worse than you think it is. Can't you see that? This doesn't make the OP's interpretation right but it's a clear consequence.

And nobody has answered another question of mine: the rules by which the OP has been suppressed and whether these can be reversed.

I think shoeluckpotland's original post was wrong to to call those involved in the posited conspiracy, faking both sides, SJWs. The giveaway there being 'faking both sides'. That's how I would see it. It doesn't make it any less horrible for a woman like Jessie being verbally attacked of course.

I thought the post was otherwise great, floating what I feel is an important idea to consider. I've never tried to write on HN before and I've never seen a post replaced with [flagged] before. How does that arise? Is it ever reversed?

You didn't answer a key question:

The thing is, the harassment that Jessie is facing could literally be one person, right? Do you deny that?

Agreed. And this technique of divide and rule has been used elsewhere. The key word being rule.