4 ms·

Compare bar ends to 3.5mm headphone jacks. You don't see them around that much anymore, but it wasn't that long ago that they were common. You'd expect someone

Compare bar ends to 3.5mm headphone jacks. You don't see them around that much anymore, but it wasn't that long ago that they were common. You'd expect someone who has basically any level of interest in audio equipment to be aware of their existence, even if they've never personally used one. I suppose I don't spend much time talking to very young mountain bikers, so maybe there's a generational thing going on, but I would assume it's the same there. And, like 3.5mm headphone jacks, new equipment may not have them, but they're not gone gone. I saw some people riding with them last time I was on a trail. Also, this complaint seems just a little bit forced given that the title image on the article is a picture of a bar end. Even someone who's not familiar with mountain biking should be able to take a look at that picture and hazard a pretty successful guess.

natch 5y ago
I addressed the picture already in my comments above. I really can't tell what's a bar end in that picture. I even did an image search and the images are all over the map. The shapes of what is shown in the search are incredibly diverse and don't clarify much. Point is, I just don't get the resistance here. I mean, the belief that articles should not explain the basic thing that their topic is about, just blows my mind. I'm not talking about every term in the article. I'm talking about the main item that is discussed.
- mumblemumble 5y ago
  If you search for just "bar end", you will get a bunch of different things from different domains. If you image search "bar end mountain bike" in order to narrow the domain, you'll get pictures of nothing but the thing the article is talking about. I think the resistance here is that what you're saying comes across entitled. It sounds like you're trying to put the onus on anyone who writes an article ever to try and cater to your needs, on the off chance that a fairly technical article they write on their highly topical biking blog might, in some black swan event, end up on the front page of Hacker News and attract your attention. This article is under no more obligation to explain what a bar end is than an article about SOLID design is to define the term "object." Heck, if I did something like that every time I used those terms here on Hacker News, people wouldn't think I'm being helpful, they'd think I'm insulting their intelligence.
  - natch 5y ago
    Fair points. To me, it's not the end of the world, but a recurring annoyance. And I definitely do not feel "entitled" so I am wondering how I came off that way. [edit: I see, I said "readers deserve," ok] I absolutely agree there is no obligation for authors to write in a particular way. That's one of the prerogatives of being a writer, they get to choose. But: I do think there are courteous things that can be done, within reason. And you make valid counterpoints, when you don't go too far, about how some such things that I see as courteous could be a downer for other readers. BTW plenty of people agree with me. My top level comment was one of my highest upvoted comments ever on HN. And I don't assume these people feel entitled. I think they just want writers to, well, write stuff that the reader wants to know. Again, no entitlement, no obligation, it's just what some readers want. There is a skill in writing to mixed level readers. Many people do it very well without anyone feeling insulted. I do wonder if there's a trick to that. It's interesting how it can happen with one author, but not another. Certainly I understand not wanting to fall into the group of authors that seems to insult their readers… not a good way to increase readership.
    - mumblemumble 5y ago
      I actually don't think I went too far. I think that, perhaps through unfamiliarity, you have massively over-estimated how technical the term "bar end" is in the context. That's honestly the only way that I can reconcile your characterization of the examples I gave as "extreme" while continuing to maintain that suggesting the same be done in this article is perfectly reasonable. Within the respective contexts of those articles, "bar end" is a much more well-known term than "pythonic." "Font proof," I suppose you could argue it depends on whether you define the target audience for the article as programmers or specifically people who deal with fonts. But either way we can at least say that it's specific to a very fine context, that, at the very least, is only a subset of the topics covered by the blog where it was written. Unlike this biking article. Also, yes, it does come across as entitled. For example: > And I don't assume these people feel entitled. I think they just want writers to... Right there, the direct object of the sentence, "writers." That's the problem. This isn't just wanting to know something, or deciding that an article doesn't suit you and deciding to move on. Both of those would be fine reactions. This is expecting another person, someone you don't even know, to do extra work and tailor their creative output to your tastes, for no other reason than that you feel entitled to ask them to do so.

natch 5y ago

I addressed the picture already in my comments above. I really can't tell what's a bar end in that picture. I even did an image search and the images are all over the map. The shapes of what is shown in the search are incredibly diverse and don't clarify much. Point is, I just don't get the resistance here. I mean, the belief that articles should not explain the basic thing that their topic is about, just blows my mind. I'm not talking about every term in the article. I'm talking about the main item that is discussed.

mumblemumble 5y ago
If you search for just "bar end", you will get a bunch of different things from different domains. If you image search "bar end mountain bike" in order to narrow the domain, you'll get pictures of nothing but the thing the article is talking about. I think the resistance here is that what you're saying comes across entitled. It sounds like you're trying to put the onus on anyone who writes an article ever to try and cater to your needs, on the off chance that a fairly technical article they write on their highly topical biking blog might, in some black swan event, end up on the front page of Hacker News and attract your attention. This article is under no more obligation to explain what a bar end is than an article about SOLID design is to define the term "object." Heck, if I did something like that every time I used those terms here on Hacker News, people wouldn't think I'm being helpful, they'd think I'm insulting their intelligence.
- natch 5y ago
  Fair points. To me, it's not the end of the world, but a recurring annoyance. And I definitely do not feel "entitled" so I am wondering how I came off that way. [edit: I see, I said "readers deserve," ok] I absolutely agree there is no obligation for authors to write in a particular way. That's one of the prerogatives of being a writer, they get to choose. But: I do think there are courteous things that can be done, within reason. And you make valid counterpoints, when you don't go too far, about how some such things that I see as courteous could be a downer for other readers. BTW plenty of people agree with me. My top level comment was one of my highest upvoted comments ever on HN. And I don't assume these people feel entitled. I think they just want writers to, well, write stuff that the reader wants to know. Again, no entitlement, no obligation, it's just what some readers want. There is a skill in writing to mixed level readers. Many people do it very well without anyone feeling insulted. I do wonder if there's a trick to that. It's interesting how it can happen with one author, but not another. Certainly I understand not wanting to fall into the group of authors that seems to insult their readers… not a good way to increase readership.
  - mumblemumble 5y ago
    I actually don't think I went too far. I think that, perhaps through unfamiliarity, you have massively over-estimated how technical the term "bar end" is in the context. That's honestly the only way that I can reconcile your characterization of the examples I gave as "extreme" while continuing to maintain that suggesting the same be done in this article is perfectly reasonable. Within the respective contexts of those articles, "bar end" is a much more well-known term than "pythonic." "Font proof," I suppose you could argue it depends on whether you define the target audience for the article as programmers or specifically people who deal with fonts. But either way we can at least say that it's specific to a very fine context, that, at the very least, is only a subset of the topics covered by the blog where it was written. Unlike this biking article. Also, yes, it does come across as entitled. For example: > And I don't assume these people feel entitled. I think they just want writers to... Right there, the direct object of the sentence, "writers." That's the problem. This isn't just wanting to know something, or deciding that an article doesn't suit you and deciding to move on. Both of those would be fine reactions. This is expecting another person, someone you don't even know, to do extra work and tailor their creative output to your tastes, for no other reason than that you feel entitled to ask them to do so.