6 ms·

Yeah, I don't like it either. The original commentary should stay with the headline, not risk getting ignored or downvoted into oblivion.

by 13of40 3y ago

Jtsummers 3y ago
At the bottom of pretty much every page here on HN is a link to the FAQ, here is the entry regarding this kind of thing: > How do I make a link in a text submission? > You can't. This is to prevent people from submitting a link with their comments in a privileged position at the top of the page. If you want to submit a link with comments, just submit it, then add a regular comment.
- 13of40 3y ago
  Yeah, I get that, but my opinion is different from the policy is what I'm saying.
  - Jtsummers 3y ago
    That's your opinion, that's fine. But the existing FAQ entry is consistent with the "don't editorialize titles" policy, too. No one gets a privileged position not even the submitter. The closest a submitter can get to a privileged position in the comments is by submitting their own content, like a blog discussing this issue and citing the Vice article and then their "comment" becomes their own article.
    - panarky 3y ago
      >>>>>> Why does the comment field exist if not to write a comment? Maybe the design of the site should reflect the policy, instead of ambiguity that results in polluting the entire first page with meta-commentary about HN policy instead of the actual post.
      - Jtsummers 3y ago
        >>>>>>> Why does the comment field exist if not to write a comment? There is no comment field in submissions. Click submit and see what the three fields are, none of them are "comment". The site's design and behavior reflects the policy.
        Brian_K_White 3y ago
        Then what are we even talking about? Is the field explicitly labeled some other way that means "this is not for your commentary"? I actually didn't assume it necessarily had a label that said literally "Comment:". I posted something just the other day myself and don't remember how the field was lebeled, but I sure wrote a comment in it, because it was just the obvious thing to do. (and the comment appeared in the form of a regular comment as though I had just added a comment like anyone else, not with the url.) So I don't know how people actually even write those posts with text and a url, since when I tried, it didn't do that, but, I also cannot begin to guess why anyone has a problem with it. Why in the world is it wrong to say why you posted something, what aspect of it you found noteworthy, as you post it?
crtasm 3y ago
I imagine for most new news, multiple people submit the link. They can't all be offered a comment at the top and people writing in a rush due to wanting to be first doesn't seem like a great idea.

Yeah, I don't like it either. The original commentary should stay with the headline, not risk getting ignored or downvoted into oblivion.

by 13of40 3y ago

Yeah, I don't like it either. The original commentary should stay with the headline, not risk getting ignored or downvoted into oblivion.

Jtsummers 3y ago

At the bottom of pretty much every page here on HN is a link to the FAQ, here is the entry regarding this kind of thing: > How do I make a link in a text submission? > You can't. This is to prevent people from submitting a link with their comments in a privileged position at the top of the page. If you want to submit a link with comments, just submit it, then add a regular comment.

13of40 3y ago
Yeah, I get that, but my opinion is different from the policy is what I'm saying.
- Jtsummers 3y ago
  That's your opinion, that's fine. But the existing FAQ entry is consistent with the "don't editorialize titles" policy, too. No one gets a privileged position not even the submitter. The closest a submitter can get to a privileged position in the comments is by submitting their own content, like a blog discussing this issue and citing the Vice article and then their "comment" becomes their own article.
  - panarky 3y ago
    >>>>>> Why does the comment field exist if not to write a comment? Maybe the design of the site should reflect the policy, instead of ambiguity that results in polluting the entire first page with meta-commentary about HN policy instead of the actual post.
    - Jtsummers 3y ago
      >>>>>>> Why does the comment field exist if not to write a comment? There is no comment field in submissions. Click submit and see what the three fields are, none of them are "comment". The site's design and behavior reflects the policy.
      - Brian_K_White 3y ago
        Then what are we even talking about? Is the field explicitly labeled some other way that means "this is not for your commentary"? I actually didn't assume it necessarily had a label that said literally "Comment:". I posted something just the other day myself and don't remember how the field was lebeled, but I sure wrote a comment in it, because it was just the obvious thing to do. (and the comment appeared in the form of a regular comment as though I had just added a comment like anyone else, not with the url.) So I don't know how people actually even write those posts with text and a url, since when I tried, it didn't do that, but, I also cannot begin to guess why anyone has a problem with it. Why in the world is it wrong to say why you posted something, what aspect of it you found noteworthy, as you post it?

crtasm 3y ago

I imagine for most new news, multiple people submit the link. They can't all be offered a comment at the top and people writing in a rush due to wanting to be first doesn't seem like a great idea.