3 ms·

I think his comment was fine and by the looks of things a few others feel it was fine too. The purpose of the comment section is discussion. Interesting meta di

I think his comment was fine and by the looks of things a few others feel it was fine too. The purpose of the comment section is discussion. Interesting meta discussion is discussion and still in some way relevant. Some of the best threads have evolved into meta discussions or taken things to a higher level.

baddox 9y ago
Thanks! I didn’t even intend to have what I would call a “meta discussion.” I intended to express my opinion, but with a disclaimer that I recognize my opinion to be a gut reaction and that my mind is open.
- jwdunne 9y ago
  I think it's a useful discussion to be had. I think where you have put forward your feelings, there will be 10 or 20 more that don't feel they can for the same reason. Acquisitions are a genuine thing to fear when it's a service you know and love. I'd say the gut reaction is natural. I don't think this is a case of aquire the talent and dump the service, the worst possibility for service users, but there's always a risk Humble Bundle won't be the same due to corporate demands and undisclosed strategy behind it.
- eropple 9y ago
  With respect: given the way that HN works (and that's not bullshitting--you've been here even longer than me!), I think that any discussion that is remotely interesting or useful (or both) will be a "meta discussion". There is not much to say textually given the way current politics or belief systems are structured. There's no oatmeal-middle statement that actually means anything. And, to that end, I would not run away from the "meta discussion" as the original poster who led to it.
  - baddox 9y ago
    I intended to spark a discussion about the expectations of this acquisition, rather than a discussion about the way we and our online communities react to news like this. Of course, this very comment clearly counts as both “meta discussion” and “meta meta discussion.” :)
    - eropple 9y ago
      But you get what I mean, yeah? Like, nobody has any interest in "the merits of the acquisition". It's all feels-based. It's whether you like conglomeration or not. (Spoilers: I don't, don't, don't!) To that end, your original question would totally sprout up the discussion it did. It couldn't not.
      - baddox 9y ago
        I wouldn’t say I’m inherently against conglomeration, except that that word has negative connotations. I have certainly at times been excited about companies I like getting acquired by other bigger companies I like, simply because of the vast resources that can be made available to the smaller company.

baddox 9y ago

Thanks! I didn’t even intend to have what I would call a “meta discussion.” I intended to express my opinion, but with a disclaimer that I recognize my opinion to be a gut reaction and that my mind is open.

jwdunne 9y ago
I think it's a useful discussion to be had. I think where you have put forward your feelings, there will be 10 or 20 more that don't feel they can for the same reason. Acquisitions are a genuine thing to fear when it's a service you know and love. I'd say the gut reaction is natural. I don't think this is a case of aquire the talent and dump the service, the worst possibility for service users, but there's always a risk Humble Bundle won't be the same due to corporate demands and undisclosed strategy behind it.
eropple 9y ago
With respect: given the way that HN works (and that's not bullshitting--you've been here even longer than me!), I think that any discussion that is remotely interesting or useful (or both) will be a "meta discussion". There is not much to say textually given the way current politics or belief systems are structured. There's no oatmeal-middle statement that actually means anything. And, to that end, I would not run away from the "meta discussion" as the original poster who led to it.
- baddox 9y ago
  I intended to spark a discussion about the expectations of this acquisition, rather than a discussion about the way we and our online communities react to news like this. Of course, this very comment clearly counts as both “meta discussion” and “meta meta discussion.” :)
  - eropple 9y ago
    But you get what I mean, yeah? Like, nobody has any interest in "the merits of the acquisition". It's all feels-based. It's whether you like conglomeration or not. (Spoilers: I don't, don't, don't!) To that end, your original question would totally sprout up the discussion it did. It couldn't not.
    - baddox 9y ago
      I wouldn’t say I’m inherently against conglomeration, except that that word has negative connotations. I have certainly at times been excited about companies I like getting acquired by other bigger companies I like, simply because of the vast resources that can be made available to the smaller company.