3 ms·
He did many great things, most of which were not terrible at all. Null, however, was terrible. Glad to see I get voted up for referencing Tony saying the EXACT
by shadowlight 5y ago
He did many great things, most of which were not terrible at all. Null, however, was terrible. Glad to see I get voted up for referencing Tony saying the EXACT same thing I said while I get voted down for saying the EXACT same thing Tony said.
- tuatoru 5y agoThe difference is that you provided a warrant for your claim in the second case, but the first claim was unwarranted (had no support). People voted accordingly.
- shadowlight 5y agoA claim that is correct is voted down because it has no warrant? A better way is to ask for a warrant rather then voting based off of your gut and assumptions as people are doing now. People don't like being told they are wrong. Why don't read most of the threads here. Most claims are unwarranted. People vote based off there gut and whether they agree with it, it has nothing to do with substantiated evidence. Most people here don't know how bad the concept of null is so they voted based off of that, never knowing that the inventor of null dislikes the concept himself. Also keep in mind, Tony's claim itself has no evidence. He never lists why null is bad. His claim is unwarranted, but his reputation precedes him. You as others do vote based off of emotion and are unable to admit it.