3 ms·
There's a weird assumption in your comment, eggbrain, that swgoof "expect[s] people to like [this] site". I agree with the factual content of everything you sa
by jholman 15y ago
There's a weird assumption in your comment, eggbrain, that swgoof "expect[s] people to like [this] site".
I agree with the factual content of everything you say, but the tone and the assumptions and the context seem way off-base.
There's nothing wrong with sharing a low-investment project, and letting it have whatever success or failure it has. The problem comes with false promises, false entitlement, and to a lesser degree false expectations, but I see no reason to believe any of those are happening here. So what's the problem?
- code_duck 15y agoThat would lead me to ask, why is he making the site? Apparently not to make money. If it's for an honest exploration of good ideas, people are going to have to use it. If they don't even 'like' it, I presume they won't use it. I could make a site that had nothing than an animated picture of a duck spinning around on the middle of the page, but I wouldn't expect people on Hacker News to think it was meaningful.
- swGooF 15y agoI originally started the site because I was planning to add the features it is currently missing. I got side tracked and never finished. So instead of letting the code die, I decided to launch it, as is. It turned out to not be a very good idea. If I added the missing features, would you find it meaningful?
- code_duck 15y agoHey, it's a solid idea to be built upon. I like what I take the point of this post to be, which is just go ahead and release what you have instead of waiting forever. It's actually a very 37-signals/paul grahamy sort of message. I do think you should keep working on it, and add what it takes to make a useful little tool. Some people here have decent suggestions.
- swGooF 15y agoThanks jholman. I was sharing a low-investment project.