4 ms·
To me the stigma is because of the terrible quality of the content. If I see an article on Medium I assume it's from someone who doesn't know what they're talki
by ad404b8a372f2b9 4y ago
To me the stigma is because of the terrible quality of the content. If I see an article on Medium I assume it's from someone who doesn't know what they're talking about.
It used to be that only passionate people would write content, but now there is this pervasive idea that you must produce content to demonstrate your expertise. Producing good quality content is really hard and time consuming and people who are only motivated by sending some expertise signal to recruiters and potential employers produce troves of garbage, often on Medium. A Medium article is the writing equivalent of an empty GitHub profile with a few unmodified forks in it.
- s__s 4y agoThe quality is alarmingly bad. I get occasional notifications from the Medium app suggesting programming articles on their platform. They usually go ignored but recently I’ve checked a few out. What I saw was really bad advice, plain falsehoods, and grade-school level coding. The only positive thing I saw is that at least the comments were full of people calling out how bad the article was.
- 0x6c6f6c 4y agoThis is definitely one thing that worries me. My forks are merged upstream and now it just looks like an unmodified fork. Perhaps GH needs to improve their signaling here with this kind of mentality being prevalent.
- yinyang_in 4y agoTrue, some mechanicm to close olds forks. Now thinking should write some script for it and clean GitHub profile. It’s seriously bad as I see now
- asimpletune 4y agoBut if the modifications were yours then that much is clear, and at the very top of the commit history. Right?
- alisonatwork 4y agoJust delete the fork. Forks that don't have any commits on top of upstream are pointless. People who are interested can already tell if you are an active contributor by looking at the other public feeds on your profile even if there aren't any forks.
- jakub_g 4y agoIf the problem is that your fork just looks like the upstream and you can't modify README in there because this would make sending patches to upstream painful, you could: - create a new branch in your fork, aside from original master/main (possibly a bare orphaned branch (with 0 commits)) - set it as default branch in repo settings - then in README.md of the new default branch, explain your contributions to the upstream (possibly with a link to github.com/<repo>/contributions?user=<yourname>)
- Too 4y agoThe activity feed still shows you made PRs into the upstream right?
- Manu40 4y agoI basically made a similar comment a moment ago I just deleted because it was flagged immediately by someone who didn't like the premise. And I was actually being fair to the author of the article I used as an example.
- bragr 4y agoI wouldn't recommend deleting comments if you really believe it was flagged in bad faith. If that's the case, other people are likely to vouch and upvote you.
- _c5eq 4y agoFair enough I suppose. That said, I personally would rather delete a comment that potentially has a brigade incoming towards it while I still can, than wait too long and suffer the consequences of malicious people. I mean, I still have the original comment saved on a wordpad if I decide to put it up again; but at a slightly later time when those people have moved on to whatever it is that annoys them next. I'm also new here, so I am doing my best to curtail the effects of the malicious against me as best as possible.