Skip to content

Comment on What's with the silence?parent

Comments

You mean “How is silence an action rather than a non-action?”? Which I already answered before you even asked it?

When people ask you for help and you don't give it, that inaction is telling these people you won't give them help.

Inaction can make you be criminally accountable, so stop having this weird belief that inaction automatically clears you of all responsibility.

I haven't said anything about responsibility, I was just poking at your contradictions. Inaction is not action. It's failure to act. By even using that word you've conceded the point.

Speak plainly. If you think there's a positive duty to speak out, make a case for that. Don't equivocate and say inaction is action. You can't build your case on contradictions and be taken seriously among rational folk. Nor does it work to get huffy and antagonistic whenever you are questioned.

I think you're completely missing the point of the article, which is saying (as I've been trying to explain here as well) that the silence, or inaction, still has a negative effect. It still causes harm. It's completely irrelevant whether you want to classify it as an action or not; it has a result, and the result is negative.

edit: and I fully acknowledge that I let myself get dragged into a side discussion on it, which I shouldn't have.

My point is that you're being incoherent and doing disservice to whatever point you have to make.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.