4 ms·
That's a snarky false dichotomy pvg, and you should know better. There's no reason it cannot be improved no matter how long things have been as they are, and th
by nonrandomstring 2y ago
That's a snarky false dichotomy pvg, and you should know better.
There's no reason it cannot be improved no matter how long things
have been as they are, and there's no reason it can't be more
interesting for me and for others.
- pvg 2y agoIt’s a dichotomy you got us into with your own snark. You haven’t described how what you’re suggesting (a very very common HN suggestion) would improve HN. I told you why it thought it wouldn’t.
- nonrandomstring 2y ago> You haven’t described how what you’re suggesting (a very very common HN suggestion) would improve HN. Well that's not true. I've said that I believe getting detailed feedback from a known respondent is better than anonymous up or downvotes, and that since downvotes affect visibility if ones aim is to improve the quality of posting/writing then it's a superior form of feedback. You call it "noise". I think that's just where we'll have to differ. Might I also say that it being a "very, very common" suggestion might bolster my point rather than subtract from it. We're all believers in supply and demand here, right? Anyway I must hush my tongue as Dang is wagging a finger at me for being too mouthy. :) respects
- pvg 2y agoIt's a long dead thread so you have plenty of mouthiness latitude. As to very very common suggestion? It has an equally common and even more persuasive rebuttal which, again, you've not addressed on its merits at all. You have 'I'd find it interesting', 'I don't like you dismissing it as noise' and 'you say many other people have had this bad idea thus it's not a bad idea'. These are all a little indirect, meta and not really responsive to the counterargument.