5 ms·

That's just the latest. David Hamburger Helper is a lot more than just that, and he's been at this for years. https://jakelazaroff.com/words/dhh-is-way-worse-t

That's just the latest. David Hamburger Helper is a lot more than just that, and he's been at this for years. https://jakelazaroff.com/words/dhh-is-way-worse-than-i-thought/ https://jakelazaroff.com/words/dhh-is-way-worse-than-i-thoug... https://tekin.co.uk/2025/09/the-ruby-community-has-a-dhh-problem https://tekin.co.uk/2025/09/the-ruby-community-has-a-dhh-pro... Jake's blog post points out how David Hamburger Helper is quite skilled at running right up to the line but not crossing it explicitly. His type is great at using weasel words and dog whistles. The kind of person who thinks he's clever for using hyperlinks in their blog posts to imply the shit they don't have the balls to say outright while going "tee hee I'm so clever for making every mention of Obama's name in my blog post a linking to the wikipedia article about bananas." (David Hamburger Helper didn't actually do this, it's an illustrative example.) In the US, conservatives pre-you-know-who would say things like "hard working Americans" (ie "not urban blacks on welfare taking public transit and using their food stamps to buy cigarettes and potato chips") or "American family values" (ie "not the gays") and so on.

bulbar 13d ago
I assumed you would link the actual articles, but instead you linked articles about his articles. One should start with the original sources at least. You got a good point, it's not always clear what people try to imply, on the other hand however I have experienced many times that interpretations were not really based on what was actually said/written. I like the first article in that regard as it is based on quoted sections. It does quite hard framing on what's actually written, but at least it's easier to judge the merit of the argument when it's side by side with the original quote it's based on.
- mapontosevenths 12d ago
  I did cite the source. That blog is doing a Lot of"reading between the lines."

bulbar 13d ago

I assumed you would link the actual articles, but instead you linked articles about his articles. One should start with the original sources at least. You got a good point, it's not always clear what people try to imply, on the other hand however I have experienced many times that interpretations were not really based on what was actually said/written. I like the first article in that regard as it is based on quoted sections. It does quite hard framing on what's actually written, but at least it's easier to judge the merit of the argument when it's side by side with the original quote it's based on.

mapontosevenths 12d ago
I did cite the source. That blog is doing a Lot of"reading between the lines."