4 ms·
> 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
by 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.