4 ms·

> "Please don't post shallow dismissals" - HN Guidelines (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html) O

by swores 3y ago

> "Please don't post shallow dismissals" - HN Guidelines (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html) Or if you're going to post a shallow dismissal, at least say something interesting about why you're dismissing, unlike your comment which literally adds nothing to the conversation and doesn't educate anyone who doesn't already know what led you to your opinion.

spacecadet 3y ago
[flagged]
forgetfreeman 3y ago
Drawing attention to the fact that people choose the absolute most vulnerable possible equipment and then express shock when it's exploited is hardly a shallow dismissal. Is your complaint that the GP wasn't sufficiently verbose for your tastes? What's the minimum word count required to call bullshit?
- swores 3y ago
  No not to do with the length. They were responding to someone asking how wifi jammers work, and they didn't address the question at all they just criticised anyone who puts themselves in a situation where wifi jamming affects their security setup. Which may be a reasonable opinion, but didn't, in my opinion*, address the question they were replying to nor did it add anything to the conversation generally as it didn't give any explanation - meaning readers either already agree and think "that sentence sums up my views" or they don't already think that in which case the sentence does nothing to change their mind. * But I'm not god, nor am I perfection personified, you're very welcome to disagree with my opinion. (Though to be completely honest I am a bit surprised that two people replied disagreeing with me, I'd expected my view that the comment didn't belong on this site wouldn't be controversial, so maybe my judgement is off in this case. But I've not been convinced to change my mind.)

4 ms·

> "Please don't post shallow dismissals" - HN Guidelines (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html) O

by swores 3y ago

spacecadet 3y ago
[flagged]
forgetfreeman 3y ago
Drawing attention to the fact that people choose the absolute most vulnerable possible equipment and then express shock when it's exploited is hardly a shallow dismissal. Is your complaint that the GP wasn't sufficiently verbose for your tastes? What's the minimum word count required to call bullshit?
- swores 3y ago
  No not to do with the length. They were responding to someone asking how wifi jammers work, and they didn't address the question at all they just criticised anyone who puts themselves in a situation where wifi jamming affects their security setup. Which may be a reasonable opinion, but didn't, in my opinion*, address the question they were replying to nor did it add anything to the conversation generally as it didn't give any explanation - meaning readers either already agree and think "that sentence sums up my views" or they don't already think that in which case the sentence does nothing to change their mind. * But I'm not god, nor am I perfection personified, you're very welcome to disagree with my opinion. (Though to be completely honest I am a bit surprised that two people replied disagreeing with me, I'd expected my view that the comment didn't belong on this site wouldn't be controversial, so maybe my judgement is off in this case. But I've not been convinced to change my mind.)