3 ms·

A single-sourced, anonymous, piece like this one wouldn't (or at least shouldn't) be making the front page of widely read publications. Is this something HN ca

by andreyf 15y ago

A single-sourced, anonymous, piece like this one wouldn't (or at least shouldn't) be making the front page of widely read publications. Is this something HN can fix? When I vote something up (as I did with the article mentioned), I'm thinking "this seems interesting", not "this seems authoritative and well sourced". The idea that someone might go through the effort of writing something like this as a "prank" didn't even enter my mind. Perhaps it might help for there to be some short-circuit mechanism for publicly flagging false stories which are found to be blatantly fabricated (or is it a rare enough occurrence that it doesn't matter)?

ctide 15y ago
Widely read publications aren't known for their intelligent discourse. HN preventing this sort of thing would be doing it's user's a disservice, since the value of this whole debacle was the discussion that ensued, not the piece itself.
pseudonym 15y ago
A single-sourced, anonymous, piece like this one wouldn't (or at least shouldn't) be making the front page of widely read publications. Shouldn't it be? I think HN was perfectly fine in this regard. There are a lot of companies that aren't 10gen that would take this, go to a court, and try and dig up the person who wrote the article to sue them for libel, whether the article is true or not. Just because in this case it was a hyperbolistic rant, doesn't mean there won't be a situation in the future where there's valid points being raised against a company that might retaliate against the author. And as has been noted, the first comments on the article were counterpoints to it.
- jzb 15y ago
  "There are a lot of companies that aren't 10gen that would take this, go to a court, and try and dig up the person who wrote the article to sue them for libel, whether the article is true or not." Please show me the cases of a company taking someone to court for libel for making technical complaints such as this. It happens all the time on blogs and in mailing lists where people sound off like this about products (rightly or wrongly) and I have not heard of a single, solitary case of a person being taken to court for libel by a tech company. By the way - the odds are that any company that tried that would lose, not only in court but also in public opinion. Other companies may not handle it as well as 10gen - but I've yet to see a company try to take someone to court.

by andreyf 15y ago

ctide 15y ago

Widely read publications aren't known for their intelligent discourse. HN preventing this sort of thing would be doing it's user's a disservice, since the value of this whole debacle was the discussion that ensued, not the piece itself.

pseudonym 15y ago

A single-sourced, anonymous, piece like this one wouldn't (or at least shouldn't) be making the front page of widely read publications. Shouldn't it be? I think HN was perfectly fine in this regard. There are a lot of companies that aren't 10gen that would take this, go to a court, and try and dig up the person who wrote the article to sue them for libel, whether the article is true or not. Just because in this case it was a hyperbolistic rant, doesn't mean there won't be a situation in the future where there's valid points being raised against a company that might retaliate against the author. And as has been noted, the first comments on the article were counterpoints to it.

jzb 15y ago
"There are a lot of companies that aren't 10gen that would take this, go to a court, and try and dig up the person who wrote the article to sue them for libel, whether the article is true or not." Please show me the cases of a company taking someone to court for libel for making technical complaints such as this. It happens all the time on blogs and in mailing lists where people sound off like this about products (rightly or wrongly) and I have not heard of a single, solitary case of a person being taken to court for libel by a tech company. By the way - the odds are that any company that tried that would lose, not only in court but also in public opinion. Other companies may not handle it as well as 10gen - but I've yet to see a company try to take someone to court.