4 ms·

It's interesting that this bit of offhand notes is taken as gospel. Quite possibly it's valid, but it seems as though the certainty of TFA could be overplayed.

briefcomment 5y ago
Unrelated, but I once came across a post claiming TFA stood for "the f**ing article", and I now can't unsee that. I wonder for a split second, before I remember what it actually stands for, why the poster is so angry.
- maxerickson 5y ago
  That's likely the original meaning, with 'the fine article' being someone squeaming.
  - briefcomment 5y ago
    Oh, I thought it was "the featured article"
    - nemosaltat 5y ago
      Based on usage here, I’ve come to understand TFA as “the FULL article.” For me, this comports with the spirit of HN rules. Used in that sense, it allows for the possibility that another commenter may have skimmed, or even read the article, but may have missed a detail that the FULL article addresses.
- libraryofbabel 5y ago
  I think it comes from the exhortation to read the manual: "RTFM!". This has been around in technical circles for over 40 years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RTFM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RTFM
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- smitty1e 5y ago
  I mean "The Fine Article" with a glimmer of the more vulgar reading.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- reducesuffering 5y ago
  It's always been "f*ing" like RTFM. Do you really think people needed to insert an F there to stand for featured or fine?
JasonFruit 5y ago
It strikes me as likely to add a footnote to the effect that Locke may have been more familiar with Hobbes than his works suggest, according to one anonymous contemporary who claimed to be a close associate. I doubt this will change anyone's understanding of his work in the least.
ggm 5y ago
My personal memoir of smitty1e might be the only surviving reference to them, regarding their comment posting. In future times, some hypothesised person is going to memory-write in post-english emoji "yes, but did smitty1e really exist" and your status will continue purely on belief in my reference to you. Entire tribes of mind-readers will ponder: "did ggm lie, or did ggm really respond to this person? how can we know?" Sure: they could have made it all up about Hobbes and Locke. Do you really think somebody would write in a basically private memoir "I remember seeing an edition of Hobbes by his bed in college even though he denied it" if it was all a fantasy? What would motivate somebody to make up, connected, reasoned fundamental statements about the behaviour of a contemporary from personal memory? I was at the University of York 79-82, and a british Comedian called Harry Enfield was also there. He was said to have kept a duck in a box under his bed and fed it weetbix. Now, go find any authoritative proof this really happened (asking Enfield himself is possibly cheating) -I defy you to find any written record this took place but I assure you, I will go to testimony on the stand about this, because I was there at the time and this story was notorious amongst a circuit in the colleges. Did he do it? Did he not do it? Did he only talk about it? Future Historians!
- smitty1e 5y ago
  > Sure: they could have made it all up Nobody seriously doubts that https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peloponnesian_War https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peloponnesian_War happened, for all there is mostly just the account of Thucydides to document it. But do we really think all of those speeches were delivered that exquisitely?
  - ggm 5y ago
    No. Hansard allows editing of speeches to be what you wished you'd said. Mind you, "shimi" Lovat persuaded his personal bagpiper to play on the beaches of D Day in 1944 as the regiment landed.(1) On the 6th. Against orders. If Thucydides was Stephen Ambrose and had written it, would we credit it or say "gross embellishment" 1. https://web.archive.org/web/20170606191755/http://www.economist.com/node/16885894?story_id=16885894 https://web.archive.org/web/20170606191755/http://www.econom...
JetAlone 5y ago
Yeah, it's a weak aspect of the confirmation bias we're all constantly subject to. If your story's relevance is amplified by the reported confidence, it makes sense to inflate one in hopes of inflating the other. Such is the world we live in, sadly. Nonetheless, it's still interesting to learn there might be such a closer connection between Locke and Hobbes. The Fine Article indeed!

briefcomment 5y ago

Unrelated, but I once came across a post claiming TFA stood for "the f**ing article", and I now can't unsee that. I wonder for a split second, before I remember what it actually stands for, why the poster is so angry.

maxerickson 5y ago
That's likely the original meaning, with 'the fine article' being someone squeaming.
- briefcomment 5y ago
  Oh, I thought it was "the featured article"
  - nemosaltat 5y ago
    Based on usage here, I’ve come to understand TFA as “the FULL article.” For me, this comports with the spirit of HN rules. Used in that sense, it allows for the possibility that another commenter may have skimmed, or even read the article, but may have missed a detail that the FULL article addresses.
libraryofbabel 5y ago
I think it comes from the exhortation to read the manual: "RTFM!". This has been around in technical circles for over 40 years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RTFM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RTFM
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
smitty1e 5y ago
I mean "The Fine Article" with a glimmer of the more vulgar reading.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
reducesuffering 5y ago
It's always been "f*ing" like RTFM. Do you really think people needed to insert an F there to stand for featured or fine?

JasonFruit 5y ago

It strikes me as likely to add a footnote to the effect that Locke may have been more familiar with Hobbes than his works suggest, according to one anonymous contemporary who claimed to be a close associate. I doubt this will change anyone's understanding of his work in the least.

ggm 5y ago

My personal memoir of smitty1e might be the only surviving reference to them, regarding their comment posting. In future times, some hypothesised person is going to memory-write in post-english emoji "yes, but did smitty1e really exist" and your status will continue purely on belief in my reference to you. Entire tribes of mind-readers will ponder: "did ggm lie, or did ggm really respond to this person? how can we know?" Sure: they could have made it all up about Hobbes and Locke. Do you really think somebody would write in a basically private memoir "I remember seeing an edition of Hobbes by his bed in college even though he denied it" if it was all a fantasy? What would motivate somebody to make up, connected, reasoned fundamental statements about the behaviour of a contemporary from personal memory? I was at the University of York 79-82, and a british Comedian called Harry Enfield was also there. He was said to have kept a duck in a box under his bed and fed it weetbix. Now, go find any authoritative proof this really happened (asking Enfield himself is possibly cheating) -I defy you to find any written record this took place but I assure you, I will go to testimony on the stand about this, because I was there at the time and this story was notorious amongst a circuit in the colleges. Did he do it? Did he not do it? Did he only talk about it? Future Historians!

smitty1e 5y ago
> Sure: they could have made it all up Nobody seriously doubts that https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peloponnesian_War https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peloponnesian_War happened, for all there is mostly just the account of Thucydides to document it. But do we really think all of those speeches were delivered that exquisitely?
- ggm 5y ago
  No. Hansard allows editing of speeches to be what you wished you'd said. Mind you, "shimi" Lovat persuaded his personal bagpiper to play on the beaches of D Day in 1944 as the regiment landed.(1) On the 6th. Against orders. If Thucydides was Stephen Ambrose and had written it, would we credit it or say "gross embellishment" 1. https://web.archive.org/web/20170606191755/http://www.economist.com/node/16885894?story_id=16885894 https://web.archive.org/web/20170606191755/http://www.econom...

JetAlone 5y ago

Yeah, it's a weak aspect of the confirmation bias we're all constantly subject to. If your story's relevance is amplified by the reported confidence, it makes sense to inflate one in hopes of inflating the other. Such is the world we live in, sadly. Nonetheless, it's still interesting to learn there might be such a closer connection between Locke and Hobbes. The Fine Article indeed!