> Dismissing out of hand as "ludicrous" that user research on small groups can and very often does produce useful results is enough to discredit the rest of thi

> Dismissing out of hand as "ludicrous" that user research on small groups can and very often does produce useful results is enough to discredit the rest of this guy's rant. In other news, dismissing an entire article based on what is only a minor detail in the overall argument is enough to discredit the rest of your rant, right? On some websites, people think they look smart if they point out a single flaw in a long article and pronounce that they "stopped reading right there". Happens all the time in Reddit. But I'd expect better from a top comment in an HN thread. Yes, the article has flaws. Lots of flaws, actually. But discredit the whole thing because of one point that isn't even the main point?