Re:A proposal to improve Twitter and perhaps the world
by coldtea on Tuesday March 06, 2018 @07:11AM
(#16528325)
>What is the intent of using "xir" against the author's wishes if not to provoke an emotional response, then? The author is very clearly identified as "he".
While it could be that (I give it a chance of 10%), there's a more likely explanation: the parent just didn't read the post or skimmed through it, so they don't know whether the author "clearly identifies as "he".
They just respond to the headline "retweets are trash" with their opinions on retweets, and used "xir" to play it safe regarding whoever the author might be.
Many people (many have said so in HN discussions) don't read TFA, or don't read the whole FA, and hardly care enough to read bylines and who the author is, etc. They just come straight to the comments, and discuss the topic as a subject they have an opinion about, not based on what TFA says.
While it could be that (I give it a chance of 10%), there's a more likely explanation: the parent just didn't read the post or skimmed through it, so they don't know whether the author "clearly identifies as "he".
They just respond to the headline "retweets are trash" with their opinions on retweets, and used "xir" to play it safe regarding whoever the author might be.
Many people (many have said so in HN discussions) don't read TFA, or don't read the whole FA, and hardly care enough to read bylines and who the author is, etc. They just come straight to the comments, and discuss the topic as a subject they have an opinion about, not based on what TFA says.