irrespective

I don't care what it does recommend, the general impression from reading this Proust-long wall of text is that esr is kind of an ass. The intent of a message is only vaguely related to its content which is only vaguely related to the effect it has on its recipient. I can only speculate what esr's intent were, I get the abstract message 'be gentle', but the general impression is that everything screams 'if you toe out of line people are right to be rude to you even if I said they shouldn't'. You can fool people with words but the general vibe of a text can't help but transpire.

No one's feelings are hurt, it just comes off as sounding like a dick. Just like the expression 'hurt your feelings'. (Nothing personal though, I'm sure you're swell in real life.)

Fine. Both are bad. What's your point?

I'm using the word as it's been touted by notorious old school 'hackers' like esr or rms. The infamous guide for asking questions [0] by esr is the archetypal embodiment of this spirit: it's not that the advice in it isn't useful (it certainly is), it's just that esr comes off as a condescending dick when you read it. (This initial impression can be easily confirmed when you dig futher into the man's other writing and beliefs.)

As for HN and the way it uses the word 'hacker', I will remain noncommital. I certainly acknowledge that the definition as it's currently employed on the guidelines has shifted since the 1970s, but whether it has actually achieved the kindess expected of it is left as an exercise for the reader.

[0] http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

Much of the so-called 'hacker ethos' can be basically boiled down to 'you may be as much of a dick as you want as long as you're technically correct'.

And yet despite all that gasp lost productivity (how dare people take care of their family!) the Netherlands is still a pretty nice place to live. Maybe the rest of the world should follow suit.