5 ms·
> 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 gettin
by 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.