4 ms·
It basically is bullshit if you have nothing to show for it. I could say I'm ex-MI6 and call you names the whole while you didnt believe me. I could tell you th
by tambienben 9y ago
It basically is bullshit if you have nothing to show for it. I could say I'm ex-MI6 and call you names the whole while you didnt believe me. I could tell you that you should try and figure out whether I was or wasnt yourself. No one will bother.
I think you've spent too much time hanging around thick-headed individuals. HN is not filled with the self-serving types of people you're describing. Commenters are eagerly awaiting support for your point of view, and you're practically spitting in their eye. No one will care what you have to say after that.
- bbctol 9y agoMy goal is to make sure no one cares about what I (or another) has to say.
- adjkant 9y agoThere's a big difference between caring about what someone says and looking for information. Your comment implied your article was mostly compiled information. At the very least I think you should consider releasing a research sheet of sorts with the sources you used/found, and which people can investigate themselves. Sure, the collection still has a narrative, but if you avoid all bias, you will avoid everything. Everything has a perspective, and whats important is that a reader can properly parse and consider that perspective, not that content is devoid of it. It's okay to not agree with an approach or argument you used before, or even the why of the existence of either. But it doesn't mean all of the content is useless.