ohjesusthatguy

"It's not because I thought the audience would be hostile, but I don't like those last few lines (mainly because of that turn), and think it's a better poem without them. Do you think it's better to leave it intact?"

This is the part with which I disagree. Let's just drop the nonattribution that you did indeed fix after the fact.

You said you edited the writing to alter its meaning. Is this not the case? While I was indeed blunt, I was not incorrect in pointing out you took the writing of a noted Lebanese author and removed the lines that offended your sensibilities.

Like I said, I am a nonbeliever. Misquoting (and that is indeed what you did when you removed those three lines) makes you look petty. Take care.

Says the guy editing poetry because he doesn't agree with the sentiment. Sure, I'll go easier on you next time.

Hey how do I get downvotes? No fair! :) Answer: I could tell you, but you need 2070 karma first :) :)

If you have hard budget caps and more than 30 employees, it means you're still not going to pay for it this year. This announcement just seems like bad timing. Or maybe they're gearing up for next year.

I'm glad the copyright appropriation will be worked on in some unspecified in-the-future release, according to a less than one hour old anonymous YC commenter, instead of being taken care of ahead of the official release.

Just because I'm harsh doesn't mean I don't love you guys :)

In the short time I've been reading HN, it's become clear that its readership likes to think of itself as more enlightened than the average mouthbreathing yokel. It doesn't mean they don't have their own orthodoxy, though, and religion is one of those things We Don't Acknowledge Around Here.

Hell, I'm an atheist and I would have added the last lines anyway[0]. Of course, he didn't attribute the poem to the author anyway so we're supposed to imagine he wrote it, right?[1]

[0]http://www.katsandogz.com/onchildren.html - the first thing I ran across, but at least the author's name is on it. EDIT: hey, he finally did the same google search I did!

[1]http://nedroidcomics.tumblr.com/post/41879001445/the-interne...

"My first choice as theoretical Quentin wouldn't be "how can I frame this accidental, perhaps even flagrantly disrespectful omission as antiprogressive and dissect the credentials, experience, and ethnicity of the people who made the mistake via culture essay," it would probably be "where do I issue a pull request to fix this mistake or in what way can I help?" "

I could tell you, but I'll need $18,000 first.

It's not like it's some backwater hellhole; it's the 53rd state after DC and Puerto Rico.

Isn't the Philippines one of those medical tourism countries? He probably wasn't any worse off staying where he was than going somewhere else.

First of all, the FOIA process take a long time to go from request to release of documents. And there's all sorts of fudging along the way to either not release everything requested or redact what gets released. I'm sure even you agree with that.

Second, "cannot function in a modern manner"? If you're creating a public record, it's subject to FOIA. End of discussion. The point of FOIA is that you, as a creator of public records, cannot hide your work product from the people you serve. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear, or so I've been told.

Okay, you're out of your mind.

I also work for an organization where FOIA laws mean anything I produce is available to anyone who asks (and knows what to ask for). The purpose of laws like this is to prevent your elected and/or unelected officials from doing things that are detrimental to society. Those "couriers... grey area communications mechanism, or... something else that is lost to the public record"? Yeah, you're fucked if someone can figure out how to request those, because they're subject to the same laws, and it sure looks like you're trying to hide something.

Leaders cannot lead if they're working against the public interest. If they're not working against the public interest, then they can justify why they're doing what they do. Period.

>It's unreasonable to expect all private communications to be on public record, and if you write a note to your babysitter during office hours, why should the wider world have to know about it?

>It's a difficult balance.

No it's not, and you know it. If you're discussing job-related matters, use your work email, not the system you had set up so that you could evade your workplace data-retention policies. Who knows; maybe Clinton and Blumenthal send all their "re: re: re: funny" cat pictures to each other through this, but I doubt it.

Any maybe your parents never taught you, but just because other people break the rules doesn't give you an excuse to break the rules. If only our politicians had any sense of right and wrong...

>Serious question: Do you think this is a conscious choice made by those in the tech field?

>I ask because my lived experience is different than that, and yes, it's a serious question even though my response may have been flippant above.

Your anecdote is not data.