News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Demolishing the California Dream: How SF Planned Its Own ... by dang on Wednesday September 26, 2018 @02:24PM (#18078820)
You called the people who want to live there "no one". Prejudice seeps out in comments like that.

(Edit: I should have said "nobody" instead of "no one"; sorry.)

Re:Demolishing the California Dream: How SF Planned Its Own ... by darawk on Wednesday September 26, 2018 @02:33PM (#18078911)
No one is pretty clearly a description of quantity, not a description of the people. I'm not sure why you would try to apply such an absurd and uncharitable interpretation to what I said, but if anything is toxic in this thread, it's that.
Re:Demolishing the California Dream: How SF Planned Its Own ... by dang on Wednesday September 26, 2018 @02:43PM (#18079015)
I get that you were talking about quantity, but the figure of speech which describes millions of people as "nobody" has also a belittling aspect to it. This is the aspect I'm talking about.
Re:Demolishing the California Dream: How SF Planned Its Own ... by darawk on Wednesday September 26, 2018 @03:26PM (#18079392)
Well, I simply disagree that the fact that a word has another, unintended meaning has any bearing on its use. I don't really see why it should, or why that would be a productive or useful social rule to impose.
Re:Demolishing the California Dream: How SF Planned Its Own ... by dang on Wednesday September 26, 2018 @03:52PM (#18079621)
The word in question has a clear meaning, which clearly wasn't the sense in which you used it.
Re:Demolishing the California Dream: How SF Planned Its Own ... by darawk on Wednesday September 26, 2018 @06:29PM (#18080802)
...and again, why is it that a sense that I didn't use matters?