OK. I wouldn't call this rude, much less "incredibly rude," perhaps the word I'd use is "blunt." But whatever. I continue to wish there was a "block this user" feature on this site.

Some people just want to frame every statement as an argument, which is not a compelling approach to a discussion. This understanding cannot be accepted by many people, because they are always considered more informed or competent by their peers. It's rarely worth engaging in replies to people on forums for this reason. It's especially true of randoms who demand their own personal standards of respect.

> It's especially true of randoms who demand their own personal standards of respect.

Avoiding strawmen and nitpicks, and the need to provide supporting arguments in a discussion are fairly widely recognised.

It seems odd you would think that they are unique to the person that is disagreeing with you.

If someone writes a detailed reply, replying ‘no’ is rude. Straw man arguments are incredibly disrespectful, and most people would do better if they had participated in a high school debating class.

Hacker news indeed needs a block button.

> If someone writes a detailed reply, replying ‘no’ is rude.

100% disagree, and that’s not what happened here anyway.

> Straw man arguments are incredibly disrespectful, and most people would do better if they had participated in a high school debating class.

HN is not a formal debate, and even if it were, I’m not sure that what the other poster said is a strawman. My unsolicited advice would be to dial back your expectations of the level of discourse you’ll get from others on this site (I had to do the same, a while back!)

It’s a technical site. It’s reasonable for technical discussions to have professionalism and adult behaviour. Judging by moderation on angoragoats comment it seems that others feel the same way.

> It’s reasonable for technical discussions to have professionalism and adult behaviour.

I agree. My point is that I believe the comment you got upset about was in fact not as rude or childish as you’re making it out to be, and perhaps looking at it through that lens would mean you’d come off as less reactionary in the future. Have a good day.

Your comment never provided any supporting arguments so you’re unlikely to convince me or anyone else to expect less from HN.

Your account is also new, so I (and it seems others) don’t think you should be giving advice about how to interact on HN.

Thank you, I will.

What if I told you I’ve been on HN since approximately when your account was created? Would that change your opinions at all? (Hint: ideally it shouldn’t, because basing your opinion on the age of my account when you have no other information about me is sloppy argumentation.)

And FWIW, your comments are full of unsupported accusations of logical fallacies and unsupported assertions like “If someone writes a detailed reply, replying ‘no’ is rude,” so I was replying in kind.

> Would that change your opinions at all?

It wouldn't, I'd be saddened that you don't know how to to have a civil discussion with others on a technical site after two decades, but I'd still feel that you should know that.

> unsupported accusations of logical fallacies

There's no point in writing something that can be be disproven by scrolling up the thread. Where I accused the other person of a logical fallacy, I wrote:

"pointing out that other people also share credit for Elon's innovations - my comment never made stated that Elon deserves exclusive credit for this, this is a straw man

You're welcome to acknowledge the error.

> unsupported assertions like “If someone writes a detailed reply, replying ‘no’ is rude,”

All positions are expected to have supporting arguments in a debate with peers. 'No' does not include supporting arguments. You should have learnt this from high school debating, civics etc. as a teenager, of failing that, adult discussion in your workplace, or failing that, participating in technical discussions on sites like HN.

> It wouldn't, I'd be saddened that you don't know how to to have a civil discussion with others on a technical site after two decades, but I'd still feel that you should know that.

Are you saying that I've been uncivil in my discussions with you? If so, please do not falsely accuse me of something I didn't do. I've been civil this entire time (and just in case you missed it, I am not @Supermancho, the user who originally replied to your comment). Note that civil/uncivil and blunt/sensitive are two different axes. My posts may have been blunt but they have been civil.

I am loathe to accuse others of logical fallacies, especially since, as I stated previously, this is not a formal debate, but "Your account is also new, so I (and it seems others) don’t think you should be giving advice about how to interact on HN" is the most textbook ad hominem fallacy I've read on the internet in some time.