20 ms·

Um maybe just ignore them?

nobody9999 5y ago
Wow. I wish I'd thought of that. Gosh, that changes everything. /s As I said in my submission: I generally just ignore such links/comments, because I'm here (and elsewhere) to discuss stuff. Then again, there are eleven whole sentences before I wrote that. Who wants to read a tome like that, so I guess it's unsurprising you didn't make it that far. I guess I need to work on my concision, eh?
- AnimalMuppet 5y ago
  Well, first, throwaway kind of deserves the snark, but you're descending to the same level, which is not ideal. Second: I think there's a difference between an article being a video, and a reply being a video. An article that's a video you can just skip, just like you can an article that's on a subject that you're not interested in. (Even there, though, it's kind of annoying: We use domain name to decide how trustworthy the article is, and what kind of bias it has. Well, youtube.com doesn't tell us anything.) But a reply is part of a conversation. A video totally destroys that dynamic. No, I am not going to follow your link to spend an unknown amount of time watching a video from an unknown source just to try to figure out what your point is. Tell me, or be ignored. Video replies pretty much don't exist for me. I don't care how compelling you think the evidence is, you failed to convince me, because you couldn't tell me. ("You" meaning "people who post links to videos", not the parent.) There is a place for videos in replies: To answer questions like "Where did he/she say that?" "Why, here, in this CNN interview, about the 14:40 mark." That's perfectly valid. Other than that kind of use, though, no.
  - nobody9999 5y ago
    >Well, first, throwaway kind of deserves the snark, but you're descending to the same level, which is not ideal. You're right on both counts, IMHO. I did consider just ignoring it, but I guess I'm a little cranky today. My bad. As for the rest of your comment, I couldn't agree more. In fact once I read it, to butcher an old joke[0], I thought it would have been better if your comment was the "Tell HN" post and mine was the comment. [0] http://www.anvari.org/fortune/Miscellaneous_Collections/367478_a-musician-of-more-ambition-than-talent-composed-an-elegy-at-the-death-of-composer-edward-macdowell.html http://www.anvari.org/fortune/Miscellaneous_Collections/3674...

Wow. I wish I'd thought of that. Gosh, that changes everything. /s As I said in my submission: I generally just ignore such links/comments, because I'm here (and elsewhere) to discuss stuff. Then again, there are eleven whole sentences before I wrote that. Who wants to read a tome like that, so I guess it's unsurprising you didn't make it that far. I guess I need to work on my concision, eh?

AnimalMuppet 5y ago
Well, first, throwaway kind of deserves the snark, but you're descending to the same level, which is not ideal. Second: I think there's a difference between an article being a video, and a reply being a video. An article that's a video you can just skip, just like you can an article that's on a subject that you're not interested in. (Even there, though, it's kind of annoying: We use domain name to decide how trustworthy the article is, and what kind of bias it has. Well, youtube.com doesn't tell us anything.) But a reply is part of a conversation. A video totally destroys that dynamic. No, I am not going to follow your link to spend an unknown amount of time watching a video from an unknown source just to try to figure out what your point is. Tell me, or be ignored. Video replies pretty much don't exist for me. I don't care how compelling you think the evidence is, you failed to convince me, because you couldn't tell me. ("You" meaning "people who post links to videos", not the parent.) There is a place for videos in replies: To answer questions like "Where did he/she say that?" "Why, here, in this CNN interview, about the 14:40 mark." That's perfectly valid. Other than that kind of use, though, no.
- nobody9999 5y ago
  >Well, first, throwaway kind of deserves the snark, but you're descending to the same level, which is not ideal. You're right on both counts, IMHO. I did consider just ignoring it, but I guess I'm a little cranky today. My bad. As for the rest of your comment, I couldn't agree more. In fact once I read it, to butcher an old joke[0], I thought it would have been better if your comment was the "Tell HN" post and mine was the comment. [0] http://www.anvari.org/fortune/Miscellaneous_Collections/367478_a-musician-of-more-ambition-than-talent-composed-an-elegy-at-the-death-of-composer-edward-macdowell.html http://www.anvari.org/fortune/Miscellaneous_Collections/3674...