4 ms·

You should assume that no one read the article. I certainly did not before coming to read the comments (although I have enough restraint to not comment myself o

You should assume that no one read the article. I certainly did not before coming to read the comments (although I have enough restraint to not comment myself on the substance of it when I do that). For better or worse, the title and the link is just a discussion prompt. The guidelines all but state that you're not expected to read it before commenting: > https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > 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." In this case, someone should probably edit the title.

dragonwriter 5y ago
> The guidelines all but state that you're not expected to read it before commenting: No, noting that accusations of not reading the article are never positive contributions to the discussion is not even in the neighborhood of advocating not reading the article. You can even point out that the article addresses a concern, as that is a useful contribution to the discussion.
- thaumasiotes 5y ago
  > noting that accusations of not reading the article are never positive contributions to the discussion is not even in the neighborhood of advocating not reading the article. That depends on whether you believe that accusations of not reading the article tend to cause people to read the articles.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > That depends on whether you believe that accusations of not reading the article tend to cause people to read the articles. No, what it is fairly charcsterized as it was upthread does not depend on that. Whether you agree that it is generally good advice might depend on that, or more generally what the net effect of tolerating such accusations is on the tone and tenor of discussions. Having experienced online discussions in many fora since the 1980s, I tend to agree that accusations of not reading doing more harm than good, like most collateral attacks on presumed motive, background, or other reasons for a post you disagree with rather than addressing and supporting the substance of the disagreement directly.

dragonwriter 5y ago

> The guidelines all but state that you're not expected to read it before commenting: No, noting that accusations of not reading the article are never positive contributions to the discussion is not even in the neighborhood of advocating not reading the article. You can even point out that the article addresses a concern, as that is a useful contribution to the discussion.

thaumasiotes 5y ago
> noting that accusations of not reading the article are never positive contributions to the discussion is not even in the neighborhood of advocating not reading the article. That depends on whether you believe that accusations of not reading the article tend to cause people to read the articles.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > That depends on whether you believe that accusations of not reading the article tend to cause people to read the articles. No, what it is fairly charcsterized as it was upthread does not depend on that. Whether you agree that it is generally good advice might depend on that, or more generally what the net effect of tolerating such accusations is on the tone and tenor of discussions. Having experienced online discussions in many fora since the 1980s, I tend to agree that accusations of not reading doing more harm than good, like most collateral attacks on presumed motive, background, or other reasons for a post you disagree with rather than addressing and supporting the substance of the disagreement directly.