> An encouragement to be mindful of language, and therefore discuss what shared context we're trying to build, shouldn't be so controversial in a self-professed 'thoughtful' [0] forum.

I think you guys complaining about provocative title and not not the substance of what is said, is what people are taking issue with.

If I didn't know better, I would honestly think it is concern trolling.

> I think it's a bit distasteful, and would prefer to participate in a community that doesn't routinely use that kind of langauge.

The entire point is that it is provocative and hyperbolic to make a statement. Often to make a statement you have to act outside what is considered polite norms and ruffle the feathers.

If Sam had given this a nice polite title (as per your preference), not as many people would have taken notice of it.

▲

afandian 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I hope you can take on trust that this is a genuine, exploration of the original point about language. And FTR I have a very low opinion of MS and have had since the late 90s.

There are usually all kinds of twists and turns in a HN discussion. And it's not like we're discussing the background colour or something far off-topic, the title is a pretty noticeable part of the article. I don't think it should be verboten to discuss these things.

I agree that transgressive speech is an important tool, and tone policing is generally bad news.

To each their own.

	▲	JollySharp0 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> I hope you can take on trust that this is a genuine, exploration of the original point about language. I find it hard believe that any discussion like this is genuine and I am deeply suspicious of people that complain about hyperbolic and provocative language. Moreover, I think complaining about it like people have is here is verging on being ridiculous tbh. Again if I didn't know better (i.e. I don't think this is happen) I would actually think it deliberate to run interference.