News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Refugees Welcome by bpodgursky on Wednesday September 02, 2015 @10:06AM (#10159195)
Your comment annoyed me enough that I looked through your history to find

> That is what it was for me when I moved to the US from Switzerland.

> Only then I realized that the way people live in Switzerland is not something you can take for granted and in the end made me move back.

Since you don't live in the US anymore, please stick to trying to influence Swiss policy. Since you aren't going to have to deal with the consequences of a widely expanded US refugee policy.

Re:Refugees Welcome by 542458 on Wednesday September 02, 2015 @10:09AM (#10159219)
That's an ad hominem. Rather than debating the merits of his suggestion, you're attacking his person.

Furthermore, it's not unreasonable for people living in one country to have opinions on the policies of others, especially when it's something like taking in refugees which has strong influences on a global scale.

Re:Refugees Welcome by dropit_sphere on Wednesday September 02, 2015 @10:21AM (#10159340)
I don't think ad hominem is necessarily a bad thing in this case; we practice it as a society by not counting votes from 17-yr-olds based not on the merits of their ideas, but their persons.

And in this specific case: citizenship and residency ought to give one's voice more weight.

Re:Refugees Welcome by 542458 on Wednesday September 02, 2015 @11:48AM (#10160021)
For sure, but we're not counting votes, we discussing policy. In the case of discussion the goal is to hear many sides and opinions of the merits and drawbacks of an issue. Just like how in an election non-voting minors can still participate in debate, in a discussion of policy I think we should still hear the opinions of others.
Re:Refugees Welcome by dropit_sphere on Wednesday September 02, 2015 @02:39PM (#10161177)
But was it an opinion?

When members of a group discuss policy for that group, they do so under the implicit assumption that their values are similar enough that what they are doing in the conversation is trying to find a way to achieve their shared values.

But the great-great-great-grandparent comment was simply a statement of values, not a suggestion of how parties concerned could achieve theirs.

I realize the lines are fuzzy: HN is certainly not a 'murican forum for 'murican issues. But its composition is such that neither is it a non-American forum. As such, the greatx3-grandparent could have been more sensitive.

Re:Refugees Welcome by ManFromUranus on Wednesday September 02, 2015 @10:32AM (#10159422)
He's not attacking his person and it's not ad-hominem, he's saying the guy is basically a moral hazard, he is advocating for policies here that he won't have to suffer the consequences of.
Re:Refugees Welcome by dragonwriter on Wednesday September 02, 2015 @12:27PM (#10160332)
> He's not attacking his person and it's not ad-hominem, he's saying the guy is basically a moral hazard, he is advocating for policies here that he won't have to suffer the consequences of.

That is ad hominem -- specifically, ad hominem circumstantial [0] -- and lies at the nexus between the genetic fallacy and appeal to motive.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Circumstantial

Re:Refugees Welcome by jacobush on Wednesday September 02, 2015 @10:46AM (#10159552)
You are a MORAL HAZARD. That is not an ad-hominem. But seriously, I thought we all share the same planet and thus share the consequences.
Re:Refugees Welcome by veeti on Wednesday September 02, 2015 @10:57AM (#10159641)
Get real. The consequences (whether they are good or bad, I don't know) are obviously more relevant to those actually living in the country than those shouting what to do from the other side of the planet.
Re:Refugees Welcome by ashleyp on Wednesday September 02, 2015 @11:17AM (#10159778)
I think you're missing his point.
Re:Refugees Welcome by adaml_623 on Wednesday September 02, 2015 @10:16AM (#10159283)
They live on this planet therefore they have to deal with the consequences of "US refugee policy"