> feel free to disagree, I don't mind -- please do exactly what you want to do

Meta: I think it goes without saying that readers will do whatever they want to. You telling the reader explicitly that they should do what they want can come across as passive-aggressive. Paradoxically, you _are_ telling them how they should behave by writing that.

Not GP but I just see it as preemptive defense as is so often needed online. "I like it this way" will often be interpreted as "I like it this way and if you disagree you're wrong!" leading to pointless flamewars.

To me it seems that people who take "I like it this way" and extend it in their minds to include "…and if you disagree you're wrong!" when no such intent is likely are just actively looking for any excuse for an argument. Those people aren't worth engaging with further in my opinion. Just wasted energy/effort, and unwanted/unnecessary stress.

>>> feel free to disagree, I don't mind -- please do exactly what you want to do

>Meta: I think it goes without saying that readers will do whatever they want to. You telling the reader explicitly that they should do what they want can come across as passive-aggressive. Paradoxically, you _are_ telling them how they should behave by writing that.

It's funny (as in disturbing -- at least to me) that you took my statement that way.

I intentionally used those words to point up my main thesis WRT this entire discussion:

  What I think is what *I* think, and is *not* a prescription
  (or proscription) for others.  Rather, it's my take and I 
  have no interest in telling *anyone* (nor should others do 
  so) what to do, think or say.

The idea that I thought I was giving folks permission in some form or fashion doesn't make much sense (IMHO) unless you assume I'm one of the people I decry in my initial post[0] in this thread, which is not assuming good faith on my part.

I'd be offended if I cared what you think/do/say. In fact, I'm only responding as it appears you think that I'm somehow acting in bad faith.

If you find my writing to be "passive aggressive," please note my username and ignore (or downvote) everything I write.

I wish you health, happiness and success. Have a good day.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=nobody9999

> If you find my writing to be "passive aggressive," please note my username and ignore (or downvote) everything I write.

I'm playing armchair psychologist here at 1am (not the only one), but this kind of comment is the definition of passive-aggressive.

You started on a good samaritan stance but upon being challenged, their comment is 'disturbing', doesn't make sense, and is in bad faith. Then you say you don't give a shit, but evidently you do enough to write a long response, ending on sarcastic good wishes for dramatic effect.

    "Passive-aggressive behavior is a pattern of indirectly 
     expressing negative feelings instead of openly addressing 
     them. There's a disconnect between what a person who 
     exhibits passive-aggressive behavior says and what he or she does."

If you really cared about people doing whatever they want, one would expect you to happily chat about their preferences and findings; instead, your default answers read dismissive and as a polite "fuck off". In that case everyone would be better off by not commenting at all. What are we here for anyway?

This:

  I wish you health, happiness and success. Have a good day.

Was not sarcastic at all.

I have no issue with GP that would cause me to wish them ill.

In fact, illustrating that was the reason I wished them well.

> If you find my writing to be "passive aggressive," please note my username and ignore (or downvote) everything I write.

I admit I haven't really looked to see if this already exists, but I've occasionally considered writing a filter for HN that would allow users to blackhole other users. And not just hiding with a thin layer, but making them cease to exist. In a hierarchical enivronment like HN it would have the effect of blackholing other people by extension, if they reply, but it's the ultimate way to curate your bubble.

Now I'm wondering if I would give it the option to auto-downvote. Ha! Call it the Spite List.

Though I do wonder if HN voting algorithms are able to recognize voting patterns like that and discount them. More than just saying "You only get X actual downvotes per day, beyond that the value of each existing downvote decreases as you add more." It should be easy to notice that user X has downvoted user Y multiple times, especially in unrelated conversations.

I don’t think Hn’s algorithm would take kindly to that kind of downvoting behavior.

I didn’t intend to disturb you. I almost never assume negative intent, so I gave feedback in case you want to take it up and prevent readers from getting that impression.

Thank you.

I didn't take it that way. My interpretation is that GP is acutely aware of how comment sections quickly devolve into back-and-forth arguments about why one person likes their own way better. People seem to constantly forget that most of what we do is subject to differing opinions.

So preemptively reminding people that he doesn't want to argue it, because he doesn't feel like it merits an argument ... well, that's totally understandable IMO.

I think it's useful in the context of the original article, which is about it being okay to disagree about cooking methods.