4 ms·
What you are saying looks good for making an argument, but seriously, he is saying the truth to some extent.
by db42 16y ago
What you are saying looks good for making an argument, but seriously, he is saying the truth to some extent.
- nostrademons 16y agoThe truth now. The problem is that words on the Internet live forever, and most people don't bother to pay attention to date stamps. At some point in the future, StackExchange will be the hulking behemoth that nobody likes, and then people will dig up this post and say "turnabout's fair play". (It just occurred to me that someday I may come to regret all my HN comments. Gulp. Ah well, it's been fun so far.)
- catshirt 16y agoso you should not provide subjective commentary on the internet because one day it might not be true?
- rglullis 16y agoYes. Or at least be specific so people can tell whether you are providing commentary or reporting on concrete facts. Even subjective commentary needs to provide context, if it's meant to be useful. Take the case with Joel (or at least the headline): Joel is saying, basically, "Yahoo Answers suck". It misses context: why does it suck? Does it always suck? Apparently it doesn't always, given that most upvoted comment here is PG giving a reasonable counter-example. The thing is, objective statements are boring and don't make the headlines. If Joel went to an interview only to say "Gee-whiz, actually SO is doing well because we managed to provide a decent alternative to EE, but for non-programming topics people are still being served by more established players like Yahoo Answers.", there would be no headline for Techcrunch, and we wouldn't be wasting our time discussing about this.
- catshirt 16y agoyou're right. but that's the kind of thing that got techcrunch where they are, right? it's easy to point back at your accurate predictions, and not remind anyone of the wrong ones.