Sure, if you want me to got into more detail, I'm happy to oblige. To me the whole first paragraph seems to be simply dismissive, painting different opinions as incorrect and immoral, talking about how surprised you are that the comments are so cold, that people aren't holding a mirror up to their own behavior, that this depresses you and that "we can do better":
> Many of the comments on this article are so cold. I can’t believe it. When I read the original article I was imagining all the constructive ways HN readers would interpret it and hold a mirror up to their own behaviour. Some commenters are doing this. But it surprises and depresses me how many people are commenting saying “no, this list isn’t what it says it is, it’s a list showing the author has a negative mindset / is not from the Valley bubble, and that problem can be fixed by just getting over it.”. We can do better than that.
I don't see any engagement (in the first paragraph or subsequent ones) with the opinions of the comments (and if I missed them, feel free to point them out), or any effort to entertain the notion that they could have a point.
There used to be a big problem online where people wouldn't consider other people's opposing views. But we seem to have reached the point where people are upset that people even have views that are different from our own.
I don't think it's "immoral" [your word] or "incorrect" [your word] to have a knee-jerk reaction. It's a fact of life. I see that my statement has landed on you as a critique of morality or some kind of discussion-suppressing wokeness, but that's really not what I wanted, so I apologise.
The phrase I used - "we can do better" - was not meant to mean "I think these replies are incorrect [your word] and immoral [your word]" but that we can do a better analysis. A DEEPER analysis which requires BOTH the knee-jerk dismissal and the interrogation of that dismissal. I don't think it's morally wrong but yes, it is depressing TO ME. I'm not saying other opinions should be banned. I'm not even saying those comments shouldn't have been posted. I guess I'm saying they should have been longer and more considered and frankly less rude!
OK, let me write up my engagement with the other comments. I do agree with the possibility of cultural differences being responsible for some of the things in the post. I also agree that to some extent the "negative mindset" criticism is in some way valid, because growing up poor DOES give you a negative mindset. But the essence of my comment was that really the substance of those comments was missing the main point. There's a 1500 word article there with someone's actual experiences - a valuable outside perspective on part of tech and corporate culture. Even if one doesn't relate to the article and think it's wrong, one can say "Hmm... this doesn't fit with my experience." leaving the door open to the fact that one hasn't experienced that particular life, rather than just further marginalising the author by acting as if they have just magically generated 1500 words of "wrong".
> Many of the comments on this article are so cold. I can’t believe it. When I read the original article I was imagining all the constructive ways HN readers would interpret it and hold a mirror up to their own behaviour. Some commenters are doing this. But it surprises and depresses me how many people are commenting saying “no, this list isn’t what it says it is, it’s a list showing the author has a negative mindset / is not from the Valley bubble, and that problem can be fixed by just getting over it.”. We can do better than that.
I don't see any engagement (in the first paragraph or subsequent ones) with the opinions of the comments (and if I missed them, feel free to point them out), or any effort to entertain the notion that they could have a point.
There used to be a big problem online where people wouldn't consider other people's opposing views. But we seem to have reached the point where people are upset that people even have views that are different from our own.