5 ms·
And clicking on a link to GitHub takes no time at all. Is there anything wrong with that approach? Furthermore, I feel that you shouldn't blame the author for o
by Igrom 2y ago
And clicking on a link to GitHub takes no time at all. Is there anything wrong with that approach? Furthermore, I feel that you shouldn't blame the author for omissions if their post is shared outside of the intended audience.
- rwmj 2y agoWe could make every reader do the extra work, or the author could write a few words once.
- JamesSwift 2y agoIt seems you are suggesting they would do it every time they post though
- dragonwriter 2y agoWell, yeah, you can go bug the authors of stories like this that someone (not the author!) at HN decides to post a link to that they need to change how they write for the benefit of an audience they aren't actively seeking, but I doubt that will do much good. But its especially silly to post on HN that authors need to change how they are writing in a thread on an article that wasn't posted here by the author, and where there is no indication that the author is a member of the community.
- mjmsmith 2y agoHe could title that section Why #3.
- retrocryptid 2y agoI suspect there was a human who posted a link to the OP's post here on HN. It is -that- human who was being asked to provide context since they should have know that by posting a link to HN, they are posting a link to a community that may be different from the OP's original audience. i.e.- this was not a rerquest or taner saner to provide context, but a request for @ericdiao to provide context.
- xg15 2y agoExcept HN explicitly discourages this: You can intentionally submit either a text post or a link, but not both. For links, you could theoretically edit the title, but there too, the guidelines state that you should just use the original title from the article if possible.