4 ms·

The point of my criticism is not to project negative energy to the creator or taking joy in my comment but to provide the creator ways that they could improve t

The point of my criticism is not to project negative energy to the creator or taking joy in my comment but to provide the creator ways that they could improve the project. Under your line of thinking everyone should just go and project good energy and never offer ways for projects that they show to other people how that they can improve. I have posted my work on HN and the comments are very insightful for what I should improve or what I have done wrong.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
adamsea 10y ago
If constructive criticism was your intent, it would have been constructive to make that intent explicit. Especially in written communication, if one wants to provide constructive criticism (as opposed to criticism which is indifferent or just being critical to be critical), then it is important to signal that somehow. Possibly with words ;) Of course not signaling that doesn't preclude the receiver of said criticism from using your critique constructively, but, imho, considering the minimal time needed to say something like "This is intended to be constructive criticism," and that doing so is not some sort of "happy-good-energy-no problems" use of language at all (your critique can still be as vigorous as desired), imho, there is no good reason not to and many good reasons (never knowing where the other person on the internet is coming from, improving one's own communication skills, increased explicitness, etc) to do so.
javajosh 10y ago
You offered a list of negativities that all ignore the author's intent, then capped them off with a statement that patronizingly declares that his project is so worthless as to not deserve existence. That is not constructive criticism. I cannot judge your intent - perhaps you meant well. At the very least I hope you meditate on the difference between destructive and constructive criticism, the key difference being respect of the author's goals, rather than your own.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

adamsea 10y ago

If constructive criticism was your intent, it would have been constructive to make that intent explicit. Especially in written communication, if one wants to provide constructive criticism (as opposed to criticism which is indifferent or just being critical to be critical), then it is important to signal that somehow. Possibly with words ;) Of course not signaling that doesn't preclude the receiver of said criticism from using your critique constructively, but, imho, considering the minimal time needed to say something like "This is intended to be constructive criticism," and that doing so is not some sort of "happy-good-energy-no problems" use of language at all (your critique can still be as vigorous as desired), imho, there is no good reason not to and many good reasons (never knowing where the other person on the internet is coming from, improving one's own communication skills, increased explicitness, etc) to do so.

javajosh 10y ago

You offered a list of negativities that all ignore the author's intent, then capped them off with a statement that patronizingly declares that his project is so worthless as to not deserve existence. That is not constructive criticism. I cannot judge your intent - perhaps you meant well. At the very least I hope you meditate on the difference between destructive and constructive criticism, the key difference being respect of the author's goals, rather than your own.