News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Notes on Tajikistan by dang on Saturday June 22, 2024 @02:59PM (#40761262)
I did respond to that question, right at the start; but I must not have been clear enough, so I'll try again. You asked for an example of where you had talked about someone's country scornfully, snarkily, or aggressively. My answer is that you did it in the very comment I was replying to, when you wrote:

> No matter how self-evidently full of excrement their droppings here may be.

I know you didn't express it that way explicitly, but context is important, and given the context, it was bound to come across that way. At least, it was how it landed with me when I first read it, and therefore I was unsurprised to see that it generated https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40751052 as a response in the commenter most likely to hear it that way in this thread.

(tptacek gave you such a good answer about the other stuff that I don't want to try to add to it right now)

Re:Notes on Tajikistan by racional on Sunday June 23, 2024 @01:52PM (#40769216)
Thanks for clarifying -- but the referent of the implicit "they" in that snippet (via "their droppings") was an (abstract) commenter -- not their country or nationality!

Which is also something you'd also prefer we not do (that is: referring to individuals with implied scorn) -- and since you're asking nicely and it's your shop here, I will make assiduous efforts to catch myself before doing so, moving forward.

So perhaps what I should have said was something like this:

   There's never a need to introduce (gratuitous) references to a commenter's nationality or other presumed essential traits... No matter how much we may object to the message or import of what they have written.
Which I would hope is a general policy we can all get behind on.
Re:Notes on Tajikistan by dang on Sunday June 23, 2024 @03:32PM (#40769966)
Yes that would be much better!