http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

http://ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html

http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html

http://www.paulgraham.com/trolls.html

http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html

Though far less important that the above, there are plenty people on HN who are counter examples to the points of the article author (vanelsas). I just had a exchange which was counter example: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3241478

It's fine to disagree, and it's good suggest improvements, but also taking the time to note the good stuff created by the original author helps and encourages civility.

Most commenters on the Android Open source story also raised some pretty valid concerns. It's not a lie that Google has been loose with term "open", commenters were ready to point that out.

There is no reason to get all worked up about valid negative points (most of which are not opinions).

Not having the right to down vote, I usually decide to go on an up vote rampage to throw the system out of whack, even if only in a minuscule way.

It's unfortunate that HN has a high concentration of people with nothing better to do than prove their superiority by tearing others apart.

It's not too unlike chimpanzee society with an alpha male exerting his dominance over the rest with a display of violence. It's not often that someone can constructively show me why my argument is missing some point.

You can down vote this too if you disagree with it. My karma here is a meaningless integer in a DB.

I'd rather have meaningful talks with open minded individuals.

First of all, why are you here? To have people tell you that you are right, or to get closer to the truth? If it's the former, then this is the wrong place (and the right places would probably bore you).

If it's the latter, then we're going to have to put forward different ideas about what the truth might be. Some of them will be right and some wrong. One can be excessively rude about this, but I find that is a very minor problem here. Usually, HN commenters are only as blunt as they need to be to express an idea clearly.

What is more of a problem is when people get emotionally attached to their opinions and then get upset when anyone disagrees with them. We're only human, so that attachment tends to creep in. But staying detached is a much more sensible strategy than everybody walking on eggshells all the time.

I am far more impressed with people who can take criticism than I am with people who can refrain from giving it.

Comments perhaps contain more critique than glowing praise because the action is at the margin. The value to me of a 'this is wonderful' comment followed by lots of 'I agree' is less that a robust discussion.

They're like a conversation you might have with a friend, one person gives their opinion, the other perhaps gives the opposing argument and so on.

But of course, if you take any single comment out of context, it's usually either positive or negative. There are exceptions where commenters give a more rounded, thought out perspective, but it's mainly short opinionated comments.

And that's how conversations often are; short, off the cuff remarks. Rarely carefully worded, equal handed monologues.

be the change you want to see in the world.

Anyway, yes, fuck you too, but if it makes you feel better, most of the Internet is populated by tools, trolls, and fools, and HN's not somehow above that. I'm not sure why you'd think that, either. As two of our greatest philosophers once noted, the Internet's greatest purpose is slandering others anonymously.