3 ms·

This is not an "attack", is just straight forward feedback, and really one I agree with, a company that has received more than 100 millions on investment should

This is not an "attack", is just straight forward feedback, and really one I agree with, a company that has received more than 100 millions on investment shouldn't have such a bad search feature

zamfi 7y ago
Really? Did you read the same post I did? > Just get the stupid dedupping done, for God's sake. > You have no excuse to so badly that a teenager can beat you by simple handcrafted rules. > First learn and do the basics and then come here to talk about your need for ML. > No one needs to suffer like this. Let’s see, the OP belittles the original authors for something they’re not responsible for, implies that they’re incompetent, tells them to go away until their problem is fixed, and, oh, for god measure: invokes a deity. This is not “straight forward feedback” to me. How about we just cut all the insults and shift the tone a bit: > GitHub has a really poor search experience compared with most modern web services. Search doesn't need fancy ML or DL, and dedupping alone would help a ton. A simple TF-IDF similarity metric would make GitHub’s search 10,000% better. You even know forks, names of files, folders, number of stars. > PS: Sorry, I had to get this out. I've spent better part of my productivity in past two years shifting through page number 50 and 100 of undedupped results that GitHub returns and it’s been extremely frustrating. See how this doesn’t blame the authors for something that isn’t their fault? Doesn’t imply they’re stupid or incompetent for some other feature they have nothing to do with? Doesn’t tell them to go away? And a bonus: It presents some approaches to solve a problem the author is frustrated by. My experience ranting on the internet is that personal attacks don’t lead to feature improvements.
- Keloo 7y ago
  I think the OP intentionally wrote it very aggressive, he even put the <rant> tag to be specific.
  - littlestymaar 7y ago
    While I agree with OP's sentiment (gh's search is surprisingly poor), putting a warning “I'm going to be a jerk” isn't an excuse to be one…
- forkerenok 7y ago
  I didn't feel that the commenter attacked/belittled anyone personally. The comment seemed to address the company (albeit in an overly emotional way). I think the pointed out asymmetry was spot on.

This is not an "attack", is just straight forward feedback, and really one I agree with, a company that has received more than 100 millions on investment shouldn't have such a bad search feature

zamfi 7y ago

Really? Did you read the same post I did? > Just get the stupid dedupping done, for God's sake. > You have no excuse to so badly that a teenager can beat you by simple handcrafted rules. > First learn and do the basics and then come here to talk about your need for ML. > No one needs to suffer like this. Let’s see, the OP belittles the original authors for something they’re not responsible for, implies that they’re incompetent, tells them to go away until their problem is fixed, and, oh, for god measure: invokes a deity. This is not “straight forward feedback” to me. How about we just cut all the insults and shift the tone a bit: > GitHub has a really poor search experience compared with most modern web services. Search doesn't need fancy ML or DL, and dedupping alone would help a ton. A simple TF-IDF similarity metric would make GitHub’s search 10,000% better. You even know forks, names of files, folders, number of stars. > PS: Sorry, I had to get this out. I've spent better part of my productivity in past two years shifting through page number 50 and 100 of undedupped results that GitHub returns and it’s been extremely frustrating. See how this doesn’t blame the authors for something that isn’t their fault? Doesn’t imply they’re stupid or incompetent for some other feature they have nothing to do with? Doesn’t tell them to go away? And a bonus: It presents some approaches to solve a problem the author is frustrated by. My experience ranting on the internet is that personal attacks don’t lead to feature improvements.

Keloo 7y ago
I think the OP intentionally wrote it very aggressive, he even put the <rant> tag to be specific.
- littlestymaar 7y ago
  While I agree with OP's sentiment (gh's search is surprisingly poor), putting a warning “I'm going to be a jerk” isn't an excuse to be one…
forkerenok 7y ago
I didn't feel that the commenter attacked/belittled anyone personally. The comment seemed to address the company (albeit in an overly emotional way). I think the pointed out asymmetry was spot on.