13

This question asked why we have to hate hats in order to opt out and I noticed that it was tagged .

Why is hating hats to opt out necessarily by design? Why can't we opt out without having to be forced to hate? What design rationale was behind the need to couple hating with opting out?

I request changing the opt-out phrase to something much more neutral.

One of the answers sums up my concerns well.

4
  • 2
    What does this question add to one that you linked to from 4 years ago? Unless you have a unique suggestion, you're unlikely to attract different answers than the original question.
    – user377035
    Commented Dec 17, 2019 at 17:03
  • 2
    I guess specifically on the clarification on why it was by design.
    – Grumbler
    Commented Dec 17, 2019 at 17:05
  • 3
    Then there's the fact that 4 years ago there was an entirely different team of people looking at feature requests.
    – Kevin B
    Commented Dec 17, 2019 at 17:05
  • 1
    You take this hats thingy rather serious, right?
    – rene
    Commented Dec 17, 2019 at 17:07

4 Answers 4

27

It's intended to be humorous. Since you are opting out, you obviously must hate hats with a passion. Grouch.

It doesn't mean you literally hate hats. It's just a funny line of text for opting out. Don't worry about it all that much, and just laugh at it. It's a harmless joke.

9
  • 31
    From the Code of Conduct : be careful with jokes. Can this site please make its mind up? It either enforces its own CoC or it doesn't. Both options have consequences. You can't cherry pick.
    – rene
    Commented Dec 17, 2019 at 17:18
  • 7
    @rene Fundamentally, sure. There's a difference between targeted jokes and jokes poking fun at software though.
    – user377035
    Commented Dec 17, 2019 at 17:20
  • 9
    @Lewis "I hate hats" seems rather targeted?
    – rene
    Commented Dec 17, 2019 at 17:23
  • 9
    @rene Towards hats. Nobody is going to judge a person for having clicked an "I hate hats" button on an online Q&A site. Well, I hope.
    – user377035
    Commented Dec 17, 2019 at 17:23
  • 4
    @Lewis I can argue this onto a slippery slope so let's not go there. Point taken. ;)
    – rene
    Commented Dec 17, 2019 at 17:26
  • 11
    There's nothing funny about hate. Commented Dec 17, 2019 at 17:54
  • 3
    Aside from hate not being funny, and supposing that humour was the intended design goal, why is it that this humour (who is it really humouring other than the authors of the opt-out phrase) takes precedence over the more serious requests of a group of users? And why is the response then "Loosen up bro, just laugh"? Why don't we just tell all feature-requesters to suck it up then?
    – Shiri
    Commented Dec 18, 2019 at 13:35
  • @Lewis This is a targeted joke. The joke is had by the authors at the expense of the user. The author is essentially telling the user that he hates hats and some of us don't want him to say that about us but I still want to opt out.
    – Shiri
    Commented Dec 18, 2019 at 13:49
  • 2
    @Shiri There is no user targeting happening here. There's no one sitting in SE hq exclaiming "Shiri doesn't like hats, what a loser!". And theoretically, unless you tell them, there's no way for other users to know that you opted out. I'll concede that this does seem to be a matter of perspective though.
    – user377035
    Commented Dec 18, 2019 at 13:51
14

I agree with Grumbler. For four years, I enthusiastically tried to get hats, and proudly wore hats. This year is different, not because I hate hats, but because I just don't feel like partying on SE, partly for personal reasons that have nothing at all to do with SE, and partly because of The Mess, which has everything to do with SE.

But forget about The Mess for the sake of argument. One can get tired of something that one previously was gung-ho about; one can simply not like holiday fuss of any kind; one can be overwhelmed with other tasks and not have the energy to spend on frippery, and so on. In my last two examples, the disinclination has nothing to do with hats, but with other aspects of one's life.

It is a mistake to try to assign profound reasons to people because they don't agree with you, particularly when the topic is trivial and many people are upset. I don't know if the OP takes the hat thingy seriously or not; the OP's stated objection was to a frivolous use of the word hate, which in the current climate of SE and the US is entirely reasonable.

0
6

It has been said: only that which you love can hurt you. I don't know if this is true, but it sounds right. To be free of pain, one must eschew all worldly attachments, love only that which is permanent, unchangeable.

Sadly, hats don't qualify.

But, some of us still love hats. Perhaps that includes you. And as with any love, this attachment brings with it pain. There are ugly hats. Poorly-made hats. Things which, in any sensible world, would not even be called hats. There are hats that remind us of our youth, and hats that herald our demise. Even the best of hats take damage, wear out, are eventually relegated to a place of honor on the wall... or even discarded.

This, then, is the paradox that underlies the question that troubles you: we cannot both love hats and eschew them; though we might rationally believe we have many reasons to avoid hats, avoid these hats, avoid hats at this time... Rationality has nothing to do with love. If we love hats, we must opt in; if we do not opt in, then we hate hats.

There is no in between; no third choice. Such is the nature of love.

1
  • 6
    Thanks for your attempt to keep it light-hearted and humourous, sincerely. Although, unfortunately I don't think this does much to change how people feel about this. It's a well veiled attempt at defusing the negative feelings people have towards the phrase but I think the fact that people (including me) feel uncomfortable with it means that it's a bit less trivial than your answer attempts to assert.
    – Shiri
    Commented Dec 18, 2019 at 13:43
4

As of Winter Bash 2020, these are no longer mutually exclusive: this request is now .

The button to opt out of hats now says "No hats for me, please" instead of "I hate hats":

No hats for me, please

So now you no longer have to express hate for hats in order to opt out of them.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .