3 ms·
> The same as yours False. GP comment and mine are not remotely comparable. GP comment has all of the failures I described - handwavy, lacking in value, condes
by throw10920 5y ago
> The same as yours
False. GP comment and mine are not remotely comparable. GP comment has all of the failures I described - handwavy, lacking in value, condescending. Mine points out those specific problems with that comment - which the GP failed to do for the article - and avoids its specific mistakes.
Yours, too, is handwavy, lacking in value, inaccurate, and anti-intellectual.
Statements like:
> To dig into the particulars is to acknowledge some form of legitimacy.
and
> we're under no obligation to accept any of it before discarding.
...are some of the most anti-intellectual, anti-discussion, close-minded, tribal content that I have ever seen on HN.
Accusations of being a "throw away account" aren't even accurate - I made this account almost three months ago and have made hundreds of comments using it. This is my account. Unless you mean "anonymous" - in which case your account also applies.
...not that that observation would have been relevant to the discussion anyway. It does not matter whether I use a throwaway account, as long as I'm not breaking the HN rules or abusing the platform (which I try very hard to avoid).