3 ms·
On-topic guideline essentially allows everything, rendering off-topic guideline moot. Could have been avoided by defining "a good hacker" but that's missing as
by balladeer 6y ago
On-topic guideline essentially allows everything, rendering off-topic guideline moot. Could have been avoided by defining "a good hacker" but that's missing as well :)
- krapp 6y ago>Could have been avoided by defining "a good hacker" but that's missing as well :) Given that it's his site, his forum and his rules, I've always assumed "anything that good hackers would find interesting" loosely correlated to "anything Paul Graham would find interesting."
- zzzcpan 6y agoIt's usually a measure of similarity to the mods, not pg, i.e. whatever dang thinks is interesting goes, if you are not "a good hacker" like dang - too bad for you. Although I do remember there was a pg article not so long ago that was so dumb and nonsensical it was flagged off the frontpage only to forcefully reappear a few hour later.
- krapp 6y agoI don't really mind dang making those sorts of editorial decisions, since it's more or less his job. At least dang seems open to a greater breadth and depth of subject matter than many people's narrow minded view of what should be relevant here. That said, "good hacker" as a qualifier is as frustratingly elitist as it is maddeningly vague.
- klyrs 6y agoMy interpretation is that "good" is meant to delineate from "bad". E.g. this isn't a forum for sploits, warez and script kiddies. Reading how others interpret this is curious to me, as I joined with zero knowledge of this pg guy and personally tend to weigh his various opinions on merit.