4 ms·
I don't know what gave you that impression, but it doesn't match my experience on HN at all. Discussions based on headlines alone tend to be accepted (especial
by vanderZwan 8y ago
I don't know what gave you that impression, but it doesn't match my experience on HN at all.
Discussions based on headlines alone tend to be accepted (especially if the poster mentions they haven't read the article), but "the article addresses your questions <here> and <here>" is usually the top reply.
- arkades 8y agoIn fairness, I tend to see two types of responses: One of the kind you mention - “the article actually says ...”, in which the respondent goes to the effort of basically summarizing the article OP didn’t bother to read. Those generally catch moderate upvotes. Then there’s the more blunt variety, along the lines of RTFM. Those catch solid downvotes. Frankly, I’d rather neither existed, and posts that clearly didn’t bother looking at anything but the headline were just flagged and deleted.
- andreareina 8y agoThere's a line between criticizing someone for not reading the article (or insinuating that they didn't read it, per the guidelines[1]) and stating that such-and-such claim is found in the article. Please don't insinuate that someone hasn't read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that." [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html