We're not talking about immature behavior, I'm specifically talking about things like people who have some disability, or people who are culturally different than the majority of HN, being largely excluded.
Re:Hacker News Guidelines
by dredmorbius on Saturday August 26, 2023 @04:32PM
(#37276625)
The adult behaviour I'd specified was "the ability and inclination to research for yourself what you might have done wrong".
If you don't mind a late addition, it's also responding to comments as written, and not as one would prefer for them to have been written, as you're raising an objection not grounded in what I'd said.
Not all adults have that capacity.
Re:Hacker News Guidelines
by dredmorbius on Sunday August 27, 2023 @04:20PM
(#37286281)
If you don't mind, could you give some examples of what conditions interfere with what parts of that process, whilst preserving the capacity to otherwise engage productively on HN?
I think people with learning disabilities and people who do not understand the tone they are expressing over the internet can still contribute positively to conversations, they just need a little bit of grace.
Re:Hacker News Guidelines
by dredmorbius on Wednesday August 30, 2023 @08:15PM
(#37330899)
Given the limitations described, what accommodations or "grace" do you propose?
A general search showing links to rationale / reasons: <by:dang please don't https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=>
You can also typically search Algolia for "by:dang" + the text used to describe what guideline was transgressed.
As I've noted elsewhere, HN operates on frictions and nudges: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37137757>
And you can always email mods for clarification, as has been noted several times already in this thread. Dang explicitly includes this option when banning established accounts in many cases.
In large part though, HN presumes adult behaviour, which includes the ability and inclination to research for yourself what you might have done wrong.