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

What is objectionable about that post? The OP said "Facebook decided they don't want to be a part of this type of content distribution" as if they were privy to some business decision that was not public knowledge. The reply simply asked them to substantiate it. I do not see any hostility in it.


To me the second paragraph reads like a classic internet cross-examination, barraging someone with questions in order to back them into admitting some misdeed. I can see how it could be read otherwise.


I can see how it could be read otherwise

Isn’t in the HN guidelines to “respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize”?




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

Search: