zlacker

>>allanb+(OP)
Ah, Worldcoin has set up booths at many shopping malls here in Kenya. The first time I saw them a few months ago I was reminded of the "OneCoin" pyramid scam that was big in East Africa a few years ago. https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/20/crypto_ponzi_scheme_c...

Worldcoin gives off really similar vibes. The footer of their website reads:

> Worldcoin tokens are not intended to be available to people or companies who are residents of, or are located, incorporated or have a registered agent in, the United States or other restricted territories.

That doesn't sound very good! And then there's this critical review of Worldcoin's operations in Indonesia https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/04/06/1048981/worldcoi...

I really don't get good vibes from this whole thing...

>>aorth+Kd
It makes me think of that astonishing line by Susan Sontag: "The [_____] race is the cancer of human history; it is the [_____] race and it alone—its ideologies and inventions—which eradicates autonomous civilizations wherever it spreads, which has upset the ecological balance of the planet, which now threatens the very existence of life itself."

But also Emil Cioran: "What makes bad [technologists] worse is that they [are steeped only in tech-centric thought] (just as bad philosophers read only philosophers), whereas they would benefit much more from a book of botany or geology. We are enriched [and gain a sensible sense of ethics] only by frequenting disciplines remote from our own. This is true, of course, only for realms where the ego is rampant."

>>50+vI
Why censor Sontag’s statement? However people feel about her statement, she chose those words.

>>germin+lN
Your instincts are wrong. HN has been a safe place as far as I've ever known (imo you're modded for being unreasonable or irrelevant here - even dumb is fine), but it's not safe to assume that you can say things bluntly in any forum just because they're true and said in good faith. It may read as bravery, but it's really just hubris. They'll delete you and tell other people to delete you. They'll report you to police. They'll ask your friends and family members why they're bad people for not shunning you.

Magical incantations and bad words are also the easiest things to avoid while still being very aggressive. Adhering to arbitrary pieties in form is actually a nice shield against people who are allergic to substance.

>>pessim+2P
Was recently banned for saying true and important things here.

It's not hubris - it's called having a spine.

>>mandma+2q1
Why not let people decide for themselves why you were banned?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34852986

>>dang+lu1
Getting a little passive aggressive there dang.

I hope people do read that, and the context. There's nothing banworthy there, at least from me. Not unless you're a big fan of tptacek running roughshod over people, as you yourself admit he often does.

You also claimed to have "asked me to stop" - which you didn't.

And when I asked you where you said that you didn't reply.

And when I emailed to ask nicely to be unbanned, as you requested, you ignored it.

So... Yeah.

>>mandma+rB1
> There's nothing banworthy there, at least from me

You were breaking the site guidelines repeatedly in that thread.

> And when I asked you where you said that you didn't reply

Sorry — usually I do reply — I must not have seen https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34856255. FWIW in retrospect, here are some places where we asked you to stop (I don't remember why I used the word 'just' though, since these are older):

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30293928 (Feb 2022)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28699914 (Sept 2021)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28650525 (Sept 2021)

> when I emailed to ask nicely to be unbanned, as you requested, you ignored it

I can't find any email that references your username. When did you send it?

>>dang+zG1
What you're calling "breaking site guidelines", I call "politely standing up to an active bully". A bully who you acknowledged was well over the line. You said nothing to tptacek about it, while banning me for putting a toe over the "guideline".

You said "we just asked you to stop" in reference to a request 12 months previous, yes. There was no other request. I think 3 exceedingly minor incidents over 30 months is pretty bad to ban someone over - and I think it's weird that you'd go so far as to dig that shit up as if it's relevant here, or improves your case.

Sure look, we all make mistakes. Since you apparently though that you'd asked me to stop recently, and in fact you hadn't, feel free to unban me.

I sent the email that day. No worries about not finding it - you're only human. Again, feel free to stop rate limiting my comments, and limiting them to those with showdead on.

I'll continue to have a spine whatever you decide, and I'll call out bullies, politely, with this account or through a VPN - your call.

>>mandma+LP1
I didn't acknowledge that, and it was you who were well over the line. Your comments in the thread were obviously flamewar. That's not allowed here, regardless of how right you are or feel.

People often feel like they're saying "true and important things politely" when in fact they're egregiously flaming. Then when we ban them for flaming, they feel like they got banned for saying true and important things. I don't know the way out of that perception; all I can tell you is that you broke the rules badly and that I'm pretty sure the bulk of this community would agree.

I'd be happy to unban you, but I need a reason to believe that you won't do that again.

Btw there's no email in the HN inbox that references your username and while I found one or two emails from that day that reference being banned, I replied to all of them and none were from you. It's possible your email went to spam, though we look through the spam bin pretty carefully and rescue most emails like that.