4 ms·

I think you're confusing two very different concepts. Observations and analysis. An observation is a fact, something that happened at a point in time, the analy

I think you're confusing two very different concepts. Observations and analysis. An observation is a fact, something that happened at a point in time, the analysis is a series of hypothesis justified through logic and evidence. The OP does an excellent job of sharing his observations, things that caught him off guard. Will these be useful to someone launching on HN? Definitely, because they will observe all the same things as the OP, who is now eliminating the surprise factor and enabling the next launcher to create a strategy around their launch. Will the analysis be useful? No. Because the analysis is limited by the OP’s capacity to analyze and is limited to the scope of his project. X will not happen to both A and B for the same P reason. Hope this makes sense. You're asking for fluff when the OP gave straight facts, because me observing the same facts for my launch might have completely different reasons.

eggbrain 15y ago
I can see what you are saying, but I'd disagree that this would be useful to someone launching on HN. The advice given is very general [besides the "Post on a weekend" suggestion]. Even as children we were told that "sticks and stones may break our bones, but words will never hurt me", a very early version of "filter out the unhelpful". For me, if the advice seems obvious, I at least want to know how the author came to that observation, why it is beneficial, and how he will use it going forward. For example, check out this blog post on "What I learned from watching notch code": http://gun.io/blog/what-i-learned-from-watching-notch-code/ http://gun.io/blog/what-i-learned-from-watching-notch-code/ You can see that while the author of this piece gave perhaps generic advice with things like "incredibly thorough testing", he told the story of what he observed, how it is beneficial, and at the end showed us how he would use that knowledge to improve himself. I didn't get that feeling with the OP's submission, such as when he said "However, it is important to not take them personally. View it from a larger perspective. Why are they criticizing you? There must be a reason why. Try to understand them and see what you are able to do." What did he do to understand the comments? How did he finally reach seeing it from a larger perspective? What was he "able to do" at the end? The author doesn't touch on this at all, and so all we are left for is very generic advice. For example, with #5 as well, we get a single instance of how he used feedback to improve his product. But what about the other feedback? What feedback did he disagree with, and why? What we get is just "We saw the top comment was to divide the videos into smaller chunks. We did that."
- abbasmehdi 15y ago
  I prefer not to have a play-by-play handbook. If I know what's coming, I like to make my own plays. Just like no two games are the same, I prefer to have the rules so I can use my own head. Analysis is nice but not necessary.

eggbrain 15y ago

I can see what you are saying, but I'd disagree that this would be useful to someone launching on HN. The advice given is very general [besides the "Post on a weekend" suggestion]. Even as children we were told that "sticks and stones may break our bones, but words will never hurt me", a very early version of "filter out the unhelpful". For me, if the advice seems obvious, I at least want to know how the author came to that observation, why it is beneficial, and how he will use it going forward. For example, check out this blog post on "What I learned from watching notch code": http://gun.io/blog/what-i-learned-from-watching-notch-code/ http://gun.io/blog/what-i-learned-from-watching-notch-code/ You can see that while the author of this piece gave perhaps generic advice with things like "incredibly thorough testing", he told the story of what he observed, how it is beneficial, and at the end showed us how he would use that knowledge to improve himself. I didn't get that feeling with the OP's submission, such as when he said "However, it is important to not take them personally. View it from a larger perspective. Why are they criticizing you? There must be a reason why. Try to understand them and see what you are able to do." What did he do to understand the comments? How did he finally reach seeing it from a larger perspective? What was he "able to do" at the end? The author doesn't touch on this at all, and so all we are left for is very generic advice. For example, with #5 as well, we get a single instance of how he used feedback to improve his product. But what about the other feedback? What feedback did he disagree with, and why? What we get is just "We saw the top comment was to divide the videos into smaller chunks. We did that."

abbasmehdi 15y ago
I prefer not to have a play-by-play handbook. If I know what's coming, I like to make my own plays. Just like no two games are the same, I prefer to have the rules so I can use my own head. Analysis is nice but not necessary.