3 ms·

Seriously, how is this on the front page and why do I get down voted for pointing out that it is less than excellent? If you want to be a better developer, espe

by gozo 11y ago

Seriously, how is this on the front page and why do I get down voted for pointing out that it is less than excellent? If you want to be a better developer, especially as a front-end developer, you need to learn how to write and value good documentation. Let's take a look at the first paragraph: > Below is a list and description of various front-end job titles Completely redundant, just makes reading and editing it harder. > The common, or most used (i.e. generic), title for a front-end developer is, "front-end developer" or "front-end engineer". Common/most used/generic? There's no need for this clarification and developer versus engineer is already covered by that subsection. > Note that any job that contains the word "front-end", "client-side", "web UI", "HTML", "CSS", or "JavaScript" typically infers that a person has some degree of HTML, CSS, DOM, and JavaScript professional know how. So HTML, CSS and JavaScript means HTML, CSS and JavaScript? Even if you want to keep this line it's an easy rewrite to 'Jobs that contain "front-end", "client-side" or "web UI" imply work experience with HTML, CSS and JavaScript'. I could go on and on, like the use of "when the word" everywhere. Half of every description is fluff that is already obvious by the context. It's not properly written for it's audience. If you don't know what testing is you're not going to be enlightened by a list of tests, you need to describe what someone in testing does and what purpose it has. > When the word "Acessibility" is included in the job title, this will denote that the developer has extensive experience crafting front-end technologies that support accessibility requirements and standards. Again, seriously?

underwater 11y ago
Your comment was almost as long as the page you're complaining about. Maybe channel your time into writing something useful instead of just complaining that what others do isn't good enough. Your complaints were all about on the first page. There are a lot more pages, and decent enough content on subsequent pages.
- gozo 11y ago
  And what does your own condescending remarks add exactly? This was the page that was linked and frankly it wasn't good enough for HN nor did it reflect particularly good on front-end developers. Maybe something you yourself should think about when posting comments with a claimed employer in your profile.
  - underwater 11y ago
    I may have been a little condescending in my response, but I stand behind my point. You listed a bunch of surface level complaints about the structure of the text which had little to do with the content. They weren't constructive at all. And it's worth pointing out that though HN doesn't have many guidelines, complaining about downvotes and that a submission isn't appropriate are two of the things that they ask people not to do (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html).
    - gozo 11y ago
      At least my comments add something to the discussion, yours is just meta complaints that helps no one. My comment was constructive, I even offered suggestion how to rewrite things to make it better. It wasn't more surface level then any other comment and I did "complain" about the content if you read the last two lines. My main complaint wasn't about the structure at all, it was about signal to noise level and not providing value. The part about accessibility is a perfect example, it has structure but says nothing to someone who doesn't already know what it is. I wonder is this how you treat code at Facebook? You let glaring faults just sit because criticism are seen as complaining? Just because it's text and not code doesn't make it less important. In fact is often more important since the value is in the text itself, while code can be "good enough" if it produces the right output. You have now made two comment, but still haven't actually disagreed with content of my comment. It's comments like yours that ruin HN by making it into lowest common denominator meta discussions where everyone just states opinions without having to present any form of argument. Since you are so concerned about my time I can inform you that I was going to write another comment about something that I had researched which five other people were cluelessly speculating about, but now I wrote this one instead.

by gozo 11y ago

underwater 11y ago

Your comment was almost as long as the page you're complaining about. Maybe channel your time into writing something useful instead of just complaining that what others do isn't good enough. Your complaints were all about on the first page. There are a lot more pages, and decent enough content on subsequent pages.

gozo 11y ago
And what does your own condescending remarks add exactly? This was the page that was linked and frankly it wasn't good enough for HN nor did it reflect particularly good on front-end developers. Maybe something you yourself should think about when posting comments with a claimed employer in your profile.
- underwater 11y ago
  I may have been a little condescending in my response, but I stand behind my point. You listed a bunch of surface level complaints about the structure of the text which had little to do with the content. They weren't constructive at all. And it's worth pointing out that though HN doesn't have many guidelines, complaining about downvotes and that a submission isn't appropriate are two of the things that they ask people not to do (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html).
  - gozo 11y ago
    At least my comments add something to the discussion, yours is just meta complaints that helps no one. My comment was constructive, I even offered suggestion how to rewrite things to make it better. It wasn't more surface level then any other comment and I did "complain" about the content if you read the last two lines. My main complaint wasn't about the structure at all, it was about signal to noise level and not providing value. The part about accessibility is a perfect example, it has structure but says nothing to someone who doesn't already know what it is. I wonder is this how you treat code at Facebook? You let glaring faults just sit because criticism are seen as complaining? Just because it's text and not code doesn't make it less important. In fact is often more important since the value is in the text itself, while code can be "good enough" if it produces the right output. You have now made two comment, but still haven't actually disagreed with content of my comment. It's comments like yours that ruin HN by making it into lowest common denominator meta discussions where everyone just states opinions without having to present any form of argument. Since you are so concerned about my time I can inform you that I was going to write another comment about something that I had researched which five other people were cluelessly speculating about, but now I wrote this one instead.