Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

1. You are ignorant on this topic. This doesn't mean the same thing as "You are stupid", it means precisely: "You lack key knowledge about this particular topic." That's how I used it.

2. I provided a few paragraphs telling why these conditions exist, and why arguing against them is not something someone educated in the topic would consider even attempting.

3. When you continue - over the course of several comments - to progress with your argument from a position of clear ignorance, it does indeed require increased naivety to the point of absurdity.

If you are going to take a stance on a subject you know little about, and then continue to assert that opinion, you can't get upset when people use more and more direct means to communicate with you. Don't assert a position that is based from a position of ignorance; seek to learn instead.

Also: I'd just like to point out the ironic nature of asserting meaningless comments are against 'guidelines' while at the same time suggesting guidelines are irrelevant for a much more important human concern.



"You lack key knowledge" is already an order of magnitude less name-calley than "You are ignorant", because it doesn't take the form "You are X". But why diminish the other person at all? Build them up by increasing their knowledge.

The distinction here is simple. Factual comments about insurance and licensing: great for HN. Comments about people's knowledge levels and getting tangled in personal bickering: bad for HN.




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: