BlazingMQ: High-performance open source message queuing system 3 years ago
"At some point that queue will fill, but that's a separate issue"
Would you recommend something to read about that?
HN user
gdy
854 karma
Posts2
Comments1,281
Honestly, I find the dialog here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36270224 much more toxic and against the guidelines. I hope you just missed something while reading it.
Anyway, there are plenty other comments like the one you found objectionable and the authors aren't banned or even warned (as far as I've seen). I believe that you are sincere, but to me the bias is clearly present.
"I don't think they crossed the line at which we would moderate comments, and I don't think they violated the rules nearly as badly as you did in this thread"
Seriously?
Where have I written anything worse than "The lengths this guy will go to, to deny his country's ethno-fascist roots. Russian-exceptionalism is a hard drug to come down from." as a reply by jevgeni's to the string of my "thoughtful and substantive comments"? [0] And I'm here assuming ignorance on part of 'marshray', not hate speech.
I cannot say I'm surprised by the lack of response but that's disappointing nonetheless. I guess the comments I asked about 'fit the culture here'.
"multiple explanations to you"
Actually, the last two were about someone else's comments and the one before that was a misunderstanding ("you've made yourself a straw man" wasn't a "personal attack and name-calling", what I meant was "you've made a straw man out of my comments for yourself to attack"). Just don't want to look like serial offender :)
I have absolutely no argument with everything else you wrote.
However, the problem with the line begins when I see comments that seem to violate the rules and yet elicit no reaction from mods.
Off the top of my head: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36270224 .
Or somewhat milder case https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32901464 with the follow up below: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32909607 (especially the last one).
True -- there are some comments I'm not proud of.
At the same time I'm not sure where exactly contradicting someone ends and 'battle and flamewar' starts.
Too bad. I find my comments quite informative and intellectually interesting.
These documents are primary sources. Gorbachev says contradictory things.
"Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, who participated in the 1990 negotiations, subsequently spoke out about the existence of a "guarantee of non-expansion of NATO to the east" inconsistently, confirming its existence in some interviews and refuting in others." [0]
Here is what Gorbachev was saying in 2008.
"Relations have further deteriorated after Nato promised eventual membership to Georgia and Ukraine, a move interpreted by Mr Gorbachev as an attempt to extend America's sphere of influence into Russia's backyard.
"The Americans promised that Nato wouldn't move beyond the boundaries of Germany after the Cold War but now half of central and eastern Europe are members, so what happened to their promises? It shows they cannot be trusted."" [1]
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversy_in_Russia_regardin...
[1] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/193...
[flagged]
"you keep neglecting to mention"
But I did mention. [0]
"how obscenely ridiculous it is"
No more obscenely ridiculous than saying that the US exists for 200 years. Ever heard of Native Americans who inhabited the North America?
Crimea was conquered by Russia, not by the Ukraine which didn't even exists as a state at that time, and Russia was busy building cities there and in all of Novorossiya.
"not so peaceful"
Why would it be peaceful? Crimean Khanate was raiding Russia and capturing slaves for centuries. Didn't end well for them.
"Except"
I didn't say it's equivalent, just an example of a treaty outliving its utility for one of the parties.
I'll bet be the US will never do it. They pushed the Ukraine to disarm for a reason and that reason still stands -- no one wants them selling warheads to the highest bidder.
"There is no practical difference between the two."
Soviet leadership acted in the interests of the Soviet Union (and their own), not in the interests of RSFSR.
"we can also say that Nazi Germany had nothing to do with Germans either"
No, you can't. Nazi Germany proclaimed the superiority of Germans (and of so called 'Arian race') and tried to achieve ethnic purity. Soviet Union was a multiethnic state, ethnic Russians constituted about half of Soviet population and the idea of the 'friendship of ethnicities' was heavily promoted.
"I have no colonial past."
But your country does.
"Then it was suddenly discovered"
Again, that's not how it was. Some people in Russia remembered it pretty well, like Moscow major Luzhkov who was helping Sevastopol with money, but all the presidents and governments consistently refused to support this idea.
"It's once again one of those things that was suddenly "discovered" to justify the invasion"
"Declassified documents show security assurances against NATO expansion to Soviet leaders from Baker, Bush, Genscher, Kohl, Gates, Mitterrand, Thatcher, Hurd, Major, and Woerner" [0]
"but never brought up"
What's the point to complain and to be told to know your place? Anyway, ever heard of Putin's Munich speech in 2006?
"skewing the balance of military power in Europe heavily in favor of Russia"
Doesn't look like it.
[0] https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017...
"Declassified documents show security assurances against NATO expansion to Soviet leaders from Baker, Bush, Genscher, Kohl, Gates, Mitterrand, Thatcher, Hurd, Major, and Woerner" [0]
[0] https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017...
"And how did Russia come to "own" the peninsula again?"
By fighting the Ottoman Empire and their protectorate -- the remains of the Golden Horde known as Crimean Khanate [0]. The last was busy raiding Russia and selling captured slaves to Ottomans [1]. The Golden Horde, in case you don't know, is itself one the remains of the Mongol Empire.
"What happened to its original inhabitants?"
Scythians [2] and Tauri [3] were assimilated by Sarmatians and later were partly destroyed and party assimilated by Goths. Why did you ask?
"Which treaty"
It looks like you are asking in bad faith and already know the answer. When circumstances change treaties become obsolete. Ever heard of Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, for example? [4]
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_the_Crimean_Khan...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean%E2%80%93Nogai_slave_ra...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythia_Minor_(Crimea)
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tauri
[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Ballistic_Missile_Treaty
How exactly does that make Crimea Ukrainian?
"people like you"
What's that supposed to mean?
"it just blends in with all the other ethnic cleansing and genocide"
It's ironic to hear that from a citizen of the United States. I heard something bad happened to Native Americans who used to live in North America.
That's only because you don't know that Crimea isn't a warzone.
Not driving on Crimean bridge after the attack last year is as meaningful as leaving NY skyscrapers after 9/11.
Just as I thought -- no source or proof whatsoever.
"Doesn't make any practical difference."
Yes, it does. You are confusing 'Russian' and 'Soviet'.
"Soviet colonial policies"
That was funny. You are confusing with your colonial past.
"If you want to start settling old scores"
It's not about that. Russia was fine with the Crimea belonging to the Ukraine while it didn't matter much for Russia and for Crimeans themselves. That was until the nationalists took power in 2014 with the help of American 'midwifing' (quoting Obama here).
"you can demonstrate good faith"
USSR demonstrated good faith when it greenlighted reunification of Germany and got assurances that NATO won't expand to the east. Look how that worked out.
You've deliberately ignored the context.
It's like somebody saying 'It's funny that girls still walk in mini-skirts in the park' under the news that a girl was raped. And then you appear: 'Nowhere did *** say it was funny that the girl was raped'.
It's as bizarre as saying "What are Ukrainian civilians are doing in the Ukraine which is active war zone?"
The difference is quite obvious -- RSFSR was about half of the USSR's population.
And who and where exactly is finding "the death of civilians ... to be a cause of great celebration"? Citation needed, as they say in Wikipedia.
Anyway, you surely will find all sorts of people among 146 millions of Russians including serial killers and the likes. How does it justify being a person who is laughing over the death of civilian couple and orphaned and injured girl?
You are confusing the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
Should Ukraine Negotiate with Russia? 3 years ago
"But in name only"
By the same logic, Crimea could never be Ukrainian more than 'by the name only'. [0]
"a magical event happened which would finally give the peninsula a majority Russian population"
There's nothing magical in Stalin's crimes which were condemned in the USSR and later in Russia many times.
"The moment the mafia-like entities ... they naturally lost any right to the benefits of the North Crimean Canal"
So you are justifying cutting water and electricity to the whole civilian population of Crimea by Russian support for pro-Russia separatists elsewhere? That's exactly what I was talking about when I said that the Ukraine lost any moral right to govern Crimea.
Should Ukraine Negotiate with Russia? 3 years ago
"I do not see why Crimea is more Russian than Ukrainian"
Because it was Russian for almost 200 years before Khruschev stole it from Russia and 'gifted' to the Ukraine.
Because according to the Western polls after the reunification with Russia overwhelming majority of Crimeans approve of it.
And last but not least, the Ukraine lost any moral right to govern Crimea after cutting water and electricity supply to the citizens of the peninsula.
Sure we are. You say that Zelensky can lie because of 'opsec' but use it to justify a random lie. I agree that he lies.
Obviously, I and the author of the comment I was replying to.
I agree, we can't believe anything coming from his mouth.
And here is Zelensky lying with the straight face: "We definitely didn’t order it, as far as I know"[0].
Russia could blow up nuclear plant 3 years ago
Of course, Russia also blew up Nord Stream. Oh, wait.