4 ms·
He made it to the front page because people here read it, thought it was interesting, and gave it a point. The fact it's on the front page means nothing more th
by rgbrenner 9y ago
He made it to the front page because people here read it, thought it was interesting, and gave it a point. The fact it's on the front page means nothing more than that. Any reputation youre attaching to it doesn't exist.
- ramzyo 9y agoHmm, I see your point. So you don't think that reputability of the source plays into what makes it to the front page? Generally, and purely anecdotally, I find HN content to be both interesting and either a) from a reputable source, generally for opinion pieces such as this or b) supported by facts, with sources, or with broadly-accepted knowledge held by the audience (such as with technical posts). Either a) or b), establish for me at least, some metric of reputability of the arguments presented. I found this particular post to be interesting, but neither a) from a reputable source in the field (not trying to put down the author of the blog, just don't think based on his bio that this is more than one dude's opinion or he's just summarizing the content of the video) b) backed up by facts to support his opinions and assertions.
- rgbrenner 9y agoPeople are free to take whatever criteria they want into their upvote. Certainly all of that plays into the decisions individual voters make when they upvote a post, but it's not required. There's no authority granted by being on the front page. You should feel free to question any ideas presented, no matter who they are from (including from people with actual authority... since even smart people are still just people).
- ramzyo 9y agoThanks for providing your thoughts on this, much appreciated!