5 ms·

Why do you believe that dumping a URL, rather than substantial engagement with the article is in tune with the HN guidelines which ask that "comments should get

Why do you believe that dumping a URL, rather than substantial engagement with the article is in tune with the HN guidelines which ask that "comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive"? I work at a well-known university, and I do feel strongly that the climate in academia has changed towards the worse over the last few years. The article articulates phenomena that are worth of engagement.

smitty1e 6y ago
Good ideas speak for themselves and weather criticism. Bad ideas require bullying and silencing tactics to 'succeed'. The rotten edifice of bad ideas is collapsing. See Glenn H. Reynolds "The Education Apocalypse: How It Happened and How to Survive It" => https://www.amazon.com/Education-Apocalypse-How-Happened-Survive-ebook/dp/B00VPPYEWE/ref=mp_s_a_1_3 https://www.amazon.com/Education-Apocalypse-How-Happened-Sur...
jasonpeacock 6y ago
It's a poorly written, pseudo-intellectual screed whining about their treatment after being held accountable for their actions, which they don't even get to until halfway through the article. There's a lot of empty name dropping, and no real apology or understanding about what they did wrong. I was so disappointed in the article I looked up what this website was and learned that I shouldn't have even wasted my time reading it. There's much better ways to write about the issue and lead a discussion than this article. So instead of writing all that, I dropped the URL for others to decide if they wanted to wanted to bother reading it or not.
- pochamago 6y ago
  I don't really understand what the author did wrong, which I think is why the HN guidelines promote discussion over link dropping. I would benefit from knowing what you found objectionable. Tangentially, I also don't find much value in media bias info, since it doesn't tend to actually address the substance of any given article.
- zepto 6y ago
  I don’t see you engaging with the content. You’ve written a longer comment, but I can see only three points: 1. You dislike the style and quality of the piece. 2. You are in full agreement that the authors is in fact guilty. 3. You don’t think people should read the piece. Did I miss something?
- andreskytt 6y ago
  See, that is the point being lamented in the original article. You claim the problem with the article is the lack of apology. This implies whoever accuses the author is right and the author is wrong. Which is true, I do not know. But the key and fundamental problem is that based on your belief of who is right, you deem the article not worth your time. This sentiment being widespread in the universities is the main thing being lamented in the original article.

smitty1e 6y ago

Good ideas speak for themselves and weather criticism. Bad ideas require bullying and silencing tactics to 'succeed'. The rotten edifice of bad ideas is collapsing. See Glenn H. Reynolds "The Education Apocalypse: How It Happened and How to Survive It" => https://www.amazon.com/Education-Apocalypse-How-Happened-Survive-ebook/dp/B00VPPYEWE/ref=mp_s_a_1_3 https://www.amazon.com/Education-Apocalypse-How-Happened-Sur...

jasonpeacock 6y ago

It's a poorly written, pseudo-intellectual screed whining about their treatment after being held accountable for their actions, which they don't even get to until halfway through the article. There's a lot of empty name dropping, and no real apology or understanding about what they did wrong. I was so disappointed in the article I looked up what this website was and learned that I shouldn't have even wasted my time reading it. There's much better ways to write about the issue and lead a discussion than this article. So instead of writing all that, I dropped the URL for others to decide if they wanted to wanted to bother reading it or not.

pochamago 6y ago
I don't really understand what the author did wrong, which I think is why the HN guidelines promote discussion over link dropping. I would benefit from knowing what you found objectionable. Tangentially, I also don't find much value in media bias info, since it doesn't tend to actually address the substance of any given article.
zepto 6y ago
I don’t see you engaging with the content. You’ve written a longer comment, but I can see only three points: 1. You dislike the style and quality of the piece. 2. You are in full agreement that the authors is in fact guilty. 3. You don’t think people should read the piece. Did I miss something?
andreskytt 6y ago
See, that is the point being lamented in the original article. You claim the problem with the article is the lack of apology. This implies whoever accuses the author is right and the author is wrong. Which is true, I do not know. But the key and fundamental problem is that based on your belief of who is right, you deem the article not worth your time. This sentiment being widespread in the universities is the main thing being lamented in the original article.