> Thank you, in one sense you failed the challenge because I'm not interested in engaging in your deeper trolling
And yet you replied, curious. In any case, that's OK, since I wasn't responding in order to meet your challenge.
It's curious that you accuse me of having "no values" and of being a "Socratic type". I assumed that, on Hacker News, a forum reputed for its willingness to engage intellectually, a simple challenge to someone's argument would receive a simple response. I assumed that rational debate, free of emotive diversions, was welcomed here. Why would "my values" be relevant? Surely establishing a rational dialogue is what's important on Hacker News. This isn't Reddit, where the standard of dialogue is typically much lower.
simiones could have said "oh yes, you're right, the last 2-3,000 years of history are relevant". Or he could have continued by providing more rationale that they're not. Yet neither he nor anyone else has responded to my observation, instead I just received comments targeted personally at me.
It makes me wonder whether one side of this debate actually has substance to back up its beliefs and actions.
Of course, you have no obligation to respond. If you do respond, I would appreciate it if you would make it about substantive, rational arguments, not personal comments.
And yet you replied, curious. In any case, that's OK, since I wasn't responding in order to meet your challenge.
It's curious that you accuse me of having "no values" and of being a "Socratic type". I assumed that, on Hacker News, a forum reputed for its willingness to engage intellectually, a simple challenge to someone's argument would receive a simple response. I assumed that rational debate, free of emotive diversions, was welcomed here. Why would "my values" be relevant? Surely establishing a rational dialogue is what's important on Hacker News. This isn't Reddit, where the standard of dialogue is typically much lower.
simiones could have said "oh yes, you're right, the last 2-3,000 years of history are relevant". Or he could have continued by providing more rationale that they're not. Yet neither he nor anyone else has responded to my observation, instead I just received comments targeted personally at me.
It makes me wonder whether one side of this debate actually has substance to back up its beliefs and actions.
Of course, you have no obligation to respond. If you do respond, I would appreciate it if you would make it about substantive, rational arguments, not personal comments.