105 ms·

Downvoting everyone answering the title question and not reading the article. You guys should be better than this. It's not about cowboying or NIH. It's abou

by libria 9y ago

Downvoting everyone answering the title question and not reading the article. You guys should be better than this. It's not about cowboying or NIH. It's about using a library called Turbolinks https://github.com/turbolinks/turbolinks https://github.com/turbolinks/turbolinks to render static pages server-side and swap the content out with js.

pdonis 9y ago
> Downvoting everyone answering the title question and not reading the article. You guys should be better than this. Downvoting you for not paying attention to why people are answering the title question--because it was the title question in the article, which then proceeded to answer a different question. > It's about using a library called Turbolinks Which is not answering the title question of the article. The article should have been titled "Build a Single-Page Application Using Turbolinks". Even the part about "without a framework" is false: Turbolinks is a framework.
- libria 9y ago
  > Downvoting you Which is fine. All contributions not engaging the content should be pushed to the bottom of the stack for the more interesting discussions to bubble up. > because it was the title question in the article, which then proceeded to answer a different question. > Which is not answering the title question of the article. The article should have been titled "Build a Single-Page Application Using Turbolinks". Clickbait is exactly why we should be dissecting the article and ignoring the title. Flag the submission if it's that offensive, even. Answering the clickbait question is just noise. > Even the part about "without a framework" is false: Turbolinks is a framework. Of course it is. I expect people to call that out as well as clickbait, but that's kind of bikeshedding. What's far more interesting to discuss is the approach: pre-rendered html dynamically swapped vs SPA's, tradeoffs, pros/cons, performance, security, etc.
  - pdonis 9y ago
    > Clickbait is exactly why we should be dissecting the article and ignoring the title. That depends on which topic one thinks is more important: the article's title topic, or the actual article's topic. I personally pick the former, and so, I suspect, do commenters who are focusing more on that than on Turbolinks. > What's far more interesting to discuss is the approach: pre-rendered html dynamically swapped vs SPA's, tradeoffs, pros/cons, performance, security, etc. Then by all means discuss it. But don't downvote people who have a different judgment of its relative importance than you do. (Note: I see that the moderators have now changed the title of this submission in HN, to reflect the article's actual content instead of its title. However, I still think the article's title is fair game for discussion. But I'll leave the final decision on that to the moderators.)
    - libria 9y ago
      > > What's far more interesting to discuss is the approach: pre-rendered html dynamically swapped vs SPA's, tradeoffs, pros/cons, performance, security, etc. > Then by all means discuss it. But don't downvote people who have a different judgment of its relative importance than you do. Well, unfortunately I'm not convinced. I don't judge idea 1 as more important than idea 2, but I will vote based on my opinion of the article being more important than the title as I assume most authors intend to communicate more through the 1500 word defense rather than the 10 word clickbait. Obviously the article has more substance to grapple with. If the title's topic is interesting, I welcome new submissions that actually deal with it.
s73ver_ 9y ago
It seems like most people are more interested in discussing the question posed by the title than discussing the product the article is advertising.
- abraae 9y ago
  Perhaps because the title is classic clickbait, and people on HN don't expect too be hoodwinked like that - and are responding in good faith to a self-contained question as in the title.
- libria 9y ago
  Is it a useful discussion, though? We all seem to already agree reinventing wheels is a waste of time.
  - s73ver_ 9y ago
    I would say it's more useful than discussing the ad. Which is still to say, not very.
zzzeek 9y ago
why blame the reader for being baited by the actual title of the post, and not the post itself, which has chosen a very misleading title?
sebringj 9y ago
What about click-bait titles?

by libria 9y ago

pdonis 9y ago

> Downvoting everyone answering the title question and not reading the article. You guys should be better than this. Downvoting you for not paying attention to why people are answering the title question--because it was the title question in the article, which then proceeded to answer a different question. > It's about using a library called Turbolinks Which is not answering the title question of the article. The article should have been titled "Build a Single-Page Application Using Turbolinks". Even the part about "without a framework" is false: Turbolinks is a framework.

libria 9y ago
> Downvoting you Which is fine. All contributions not engaging the content should be pushed to the bottom of the stack for the more interesting discussions to bubble up. > because it was the title question in the article, which then proceeded to answer a different question. > Which is not answering the title question of the article. The article should have been titled "Build a Single-Page Application Using Turbolinks". Clickbait is exactly why we should be dissecting the article and ignoring the title. Flag the submission if it's that offensive, even. Answering the clickbait question is just noise. > Even the part about "without a framework" is false: Turbolinks is a framework. Of course it is. I expect people to call that out as well as clickbait, but that's kind of bikeshedding. What's far more interesting to discuss is the approach: pre-rendered html dynamically swapped vs SPA's, tradeoffs, pros/cons, performance, security, etc.
- pdonis 9y ago
  > Clickbait is exactly why we should be dissecting the article and ignoring the title. That depends on which topic one thinks is more important: the article's title topic, or the actual article's topic. I personally pick the former, and so, I suspect, do commenters who are focusing more on that than on Turbolinks. > What's far more interesting to discuss is the approach: pre-rendered html dynamically swapped vs SPA's, tradeoffs, pros/cons, performance, security, etc. Then by all means discuss it. But don't downvote people who have a different judgment of its relative importance than you do. (Note: I see that the moderators have now changed the title of this submission in HN, to reflect the article's actual content instead of its title. However, I still think the article's title is fair game for discussion. But I'll leave the final decision on that to the moderators.)
  - libria 9y ago
    > > What's far more interesting to discuss is the approach: pre-rendered html dynamically swapped vs SPA's, tradeoffs, pros/cons, performance, security, etc. > Then by all means discuss it. But don't downvote people who have a different judgment of its relative importance than you do. Well, unfortunately I'm not convinced. I don't judge idea 1 as more important than idea 2, but I will vote based on my opinion of the article being more important than the title as I assume most authors intend to communicate more through the 1500 word defense rather than the 10 word clickbait. Obviously the article has more substance to grapple with. If the title's topic is interesting, I welcome new submissions that actually deal with it.

s73ver_ 9y ago

It seems like most people are more interested in discussing the question posed by the title than discussing the product the article is advertising.

abraae 9y ago
Perhaps because the title is classic clickbait, and people on HN don't expect too be hoodwinked like that - and are responding in good faith to a self-contained question as in the title.
libria 9y ago
Is it a useful discussion, though? We all seem to already agree reinventing wheels is a waste of time.
- s73ver_ 9y ago
  I would say it's more useful than discussing the ad. Which is still to say, not very.

zzzeek 9y ago

why blame the reader for being baited by the actual title of the post, and not the post itself, which has chosen a very misleading title?

sebringj 9y ago

What about click-bait titles?