With respect, I'm not sure which of these guidelines you think my post violates? Could you clarify for me? I'm particularly interested in your "destroys what it is for" comment, I'm not sure I understand. If you could elaborate that would be awesome.
I think it's important to point out that this person who is lionised by so many was actually an objectively bad person who did reprehensible things.
For starters, the guideline against calling names ("piece of shit") and the guideline against fulminating.
HN is supposed to be, above all, for curious conversation. No doubt people do reprehensible things, but taking revenge on them for it in internet comments simply isn't curious conversation. It's not a question of whether you're right or not—you may well be completely right—but it's not what this site is for.
That's not unreasonable. I perhaps could have worded it more neutrally. Though IMO scumbags need to be called scumbags.
It's not about "taking revenge", it's about setting the record straight. As mentioned, I don't think this person should be lionised. And I think that the constant idolisation of this (bad) person does the industry and history a disservice. And I think that there are people who might be curious about the facts of this person's track record if they were alerted to them. By a comment like mine.
I know it feels like one is correcting something and therefore "setting the record straight", but you can provide correct information without breaking the site guidelines.
I'm a piece of shit. I have changed very few lives and accomplished very little. There are a lot of us. The only reason we are talking about Steve Jobs here is that, piece of shit or not, Steve changed very many lives and accomplished much.
Ah perception vs perspective. We perceive the same things but have different perspectives. And yes I have done terrible things. I even worked for Steve Jobs.
