← Back to context

Comment by cmrdporcupine

4 hours ago

Vociferous and aggressive "skepticism" on the RIP page for someone seems entirely distasteful, for one.

People crying about being "censored" -- their comments are still visible if you really want to see them -- that's not censorship. Just not a mandatory granted audience -- for saying shitty things about someone that just passed away... garners little sympathy from me.

And then putting that aside, the linked twitter thread people keep regurgitating has been shown by other people to contain a number of outright falsehoods.

So do we really need to have this conversation here? And why? Is this the right forum and time for these people to have it out with their grievances? I really think not.

I think there's a bit of a double standard on HN when it comes to criticism of the recently deceased. Robert X. Cringely's "RIP" post had numerous (and perhaps valid) criticisms of his actions over the years, and a follow-up post was made a day or two later solely about a controversy he was embroiled in. I don't remember seeing a single flagged criticism or accusation of poor taste.

I think it's important to view accusations through the lens of the accusations themselves, rather than to enforce a "Don't speak ill of the dead" culture which could be considered anti-intellectual and as stated previously often applied selectively. You say people are spreading falsehoods, and in that case I think it is wise to attempt to correct them, rather than assume the person taken in by them to be acting with devilish intentions, and to clearly separate those who are undeniably acting maliciously from people who may be acting innocently.