2 ms·
Why does an "open letter" seem to warrant more attention than a random post? And in the world of tech if you say "considered harmful" it's a similar thing - th
by andrewstuart 3y ago
Why does an "open letter" seem to warrant more attention than a random post?
And in the world of tech if you say "considered harmful" it's a similar thing - the label makes the message worthy of attention.
Hard to understand but that's the way people seem to work.
- syndicatedjelly 3y agoIs this comment productive? Rather than talk about the article you’re fixated on some minor transgression that someone made in the title and personally offends you
- andrewstuart 3y agoYou must be new here - welcome to HN. Tangents are part of life here my friend.
- MichaelZuo 3y agoThere are quite a lot of HN users that insist on logical correctness at least the vast majority of the time, and they will probably outlast you both in a debate and as a participant in online commenting. So it's just one of those things that you either accept or downvote and move on.
- replwoacause 3y agoI’m not sure if it needs to be productive, per se, but it’s a valid question to ask. Based on that, I don’t see your comment as being any more productive than the one you’re scrutinzing.
- dspillett 3y agoTo me “open letter” usually signifies that there are a significant number of signatories, like various open letters to governments from the scientific community, with one not being a significant enough number to qualify however important that one person is (or thinks they are!). Sort-of like difference between some random person telling you that you are too drunk too often, and a group of concerned friends & relatives staging an intervention, to put it into a social context. It is that significant number of significant (either to the receiver of the letter, to the public at large, or both) people that makes it important. Here I feel the term is being used incorrectly.