3 ms·

This is directly addressed inside the article, in the last sections.

by jb1991 6y ago

saagarjha 6y ago
Ok, so claiming I didn’t read the article is actually against the guidelines, and you’ve done so twice so I’m not particularly in the mood to really entertain it anymore. Like, if you read the comment you just replied to, you’ll see why I made the first comment even though the thing it mentions gets a line in the article. But arguing about who read what is not fun so I’d rather we actually talk about the article itself.
- jb1991 6y ago
  Sorry if I got the wrong impression. It’s an easy impression to make when you keep complaining in multiple comments that the article is omitting key things that are actually discussed in the article. Perhaps it’s just the way you were communicating your opinion that is misleading. It’s not just me, I can see at least three or four people here who are trying to point out things in the article that you seem to have missed.
  - saagarjha 6y ago
    I will concede that my original comment was unclear; I am not particularly annoyed I had to clarify it a few times. I was just (somewhat unreasonably) annoyed that poeple thought I hadn't read the article.
- vonmoltke 6y ago
  > Ok, so claiming I didn’t read the article is actually against the guidelines, and you’ve done so twice so I’m not particularly in the mood to really entertain it anymore. First off, you are responding to two different posters. Second, neither vbsteven nor jb1991 said you didn't read the article, they pointed out things that were addressed in the article. The phrasing they used is explicitly called out as acceptable in the guidelines: > Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - saagarjha 6y ago
    No, I am responding only to 'jb1991; here is the other comment you missed: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25122691 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25122691. I was annoyed because the sum total of those seemed to be a claim that I did not read it, not just a straight quote (which I had a few of already, mind you).

This is directly addressed inside the article, in the last sections.

by jb1991 6y ago

This is directly addressed inside the article, in the last sections.

Ok, so claiming I didn’t read the article is actually against the guidelines, and you’ve done so twice so I’m not particularly in the mood to really entertain it anymore. Like, if you read the comment you just replied to, you’ll see why I made the first comment even though the thing it mentions gets a line in the article. But arguing about who read what is not fun so I’d rather we actually talk about the article itself.

jb1991 6y ago
Sorry if I got the wrong impression. It’s an easy impression to make when you keep complaining in multiple comments that the article is omitting key things that are actually discussed in the article. Perhaps it’s just the way you were communicating your opinion that is misleading. It’s not just me, I can see at least three or four people here who are trying to point out things in the article that you seem to have missed.
- saagarjha 6y ago
  I will concede that my original comment was unclear; I am not particularly annoyed I had to clarify it a few times. I was just (somewhat unreasonably) annoyed that poeple thought I hadn't read the article.
vonmoltke 6y ago
> Ok, so claiming I didn’t read the article is actually against the guidelines, and you’ve done so twice so I’m not particularly in the mood to really entertain it anymore. First off, you are responding to two different posters. Second, neither vbsteven nor jb1991 said you didn't read the article, they pointed out things that were addressed in the article. The phrasing they used is explicitly called out as acceptable in the guidelines: > Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- saagarjha 6y ago
  No, I am responding only to 'jb1991; here is the other comment you missed: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25122691 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25122691. I was annoyed because the sum total of those seemed to be a claim that I did not read it, not just a straight quote (which I had a few of already, mind you).