I don't know how this could be argued off-topic when it directly pertained to the parent comment. If anything the parent comment was off-topic, and I found it unseemly that oska would use the occasion of Mr. Grove's death to promote a political agenda.
I felt compelled in the interest of Mr. Grove's memory to point out the flaws in oska's statement.
Was this really a joint decision, or is that a royal we?
Glancing at your comment history, dang, it becomes apparent that the ratio of pleasant to unpleasant interactions you have on this site is quite lopsided.(excuse my presumption)
So I just want to say thanks for all the actions you take to make HN a better place, even if I don't agree with them all.
I wouldn't call it censorship, but that word has so many different meanings.
I didn't see oska's comment as particularly political but now that you mention it I suppose we could have just marked the whole subthread off-topic. Your reply, though, certainly was, since it stopped being about Grove and went into racial speculations... a bad sign on HN at the best of times. Also the going on about downvoting was super off topic and explicitly against the HN guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
Most importantly, though, thanks for taking the time to also express good will. That was nice of you and I really appreciate it.
This is such a strange comment, but I'm finding it hard to put my finger on exactly why. It's something to do with how you're happy to make generalisations about Jews, but careful in how you demonise Syrians, Iraqis and Afghans.
> It's something to do with how you're happy to make generalisations about Jews, but careful in how you demonise Syrians, Iraqis and Afghans.
That's the part you found odd? That part's not so strange, people are OK with generalizations when they are positive, and not OK when they are negative.
It's combining the two subjects that I found offputting.
It's probably strange because it describes a basic reality of the world, but one that so many people strain to avert their eyes from.
I'm not making any generalisations about Jews. Just conveying what looking at any Sunday Times, or Forbes rich list will tell you, or what looking at the annals of scientific history or the recipients list of Nobel prizes will tell you, or what looking at a list of highly regarded concert pianists or violinists will tell you, etc. etc.
But I'm not much interested in going back and forth about this, the facts are the facts. And I already found it strange that oska took a thread of this sort as an opportunity to promote an agenda that is basically against the interests of all involved, i.e. mass migrations of cultures into lands where they are wholly incompatible with the native culture.
The behaviour of people whos "orthodox" are able to discuss gods-rules en detail and find workarounds - has everything to do with how you percive the world and approach everything. Its a mindset word approaching.
I too thought it was off-topic, but unless I'm mistaken that's what oska was referring to. S/he brought it up, don't chastise me.
And you're right, they are mostly unrelated. That was the point of my comment, oska attempted to relate them by making a false equivalency, and I corrected him/her.
