Sigal published bits of reminiscence in (I think) The Atlantic about forty years ago. These did not include gossip about Lessing or Laing, rather were about making a living as a writer in the UK.
and what would that give you? Some ahistorical analog, I suppose. It's seems more like historical memoir than propaganda - a sign of different times.
Honestly, I don't know what to do with the jewish reference. I'm sure you mean something in particular, but I'm not sure what it is you mean.
I appreciate your attempt to make actual conversation out of that comment but this is probably better classified as a please-don't-feed-the-trolls occasion. Or, as the HN guidelines put it:
"Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead."
Whoa, I agree that the parent was a bad comment that missed everything interesting thing about the article (of which there must be at least 100, which is why I submitted it), but please don't respond to a bad comment by breaking the site guidelines yourself, and certainly not by crossing into personal attack. It only makes things worse.
(that said, I do feel like you deserve a clancy exemption in this case)
Thanks for the reminder dang and yes, I was agitated because I thought it was the pursuit of the Clancy Sigil and I was wondering how any of you know about it when we have worked so hard to keep it hidden!
Gosh. This is such a really well-written piece, and honestly, about someone I don't know, but probably should.
Sigal published bits of reminiscence in (I think) The Atlantic about forty years ago. These did not include gossip about Lessing or Laing, rather were about making a living as a writer in the UK.
[flagged]
> replace each instance with right wing instead
and what would that give you? Some ahistorical analog, I suppose. It's seems more like historical memoir than propaganda - a sign of different times. Honestly, I don't know what to do with the jewish reference. I'm sure you mean something in particular, but I'm not sure what it is you mean.
I appreciate your attempt to make actual conversation out of that comment but this is probably better classified as a please-don't-feed-the-trolls occasion. Or, as the HN guidelines put it:
"Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead."
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
[flagged]
Whoa, I agree that the parent was a bad comment that missed everything interesting thing about the article (of which there must be at least 100, which is why I submitted it), but please don't respond to a bad comment by breaking the site guidelines yourself, and certainly not by crossing into personal attack. It only makes things worse.
(that said, I do feel like you deserve a clancy exemption in this case)
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Thanks for the reminder dang and yes, I was agitated because I thought it was the pursuit of the Clancy Sigil and I was wondering how any of you know about it when we have worked so hard to keep it hidden!
[dead]