3 ms·

I stopped reading here: >Science has a high media profile and a powerful lobby group: in the midst of a global recession and sweeping government cuts, science

I stopped reading here: >Science has a high media profile and a powerful lobby group: in the midst of a global recession and sweeping government cuts, science funding has generally held up or even increased Perhaps science funding has held up because science was fricking responsible for the economy booming for the last 500 fricking years? E.g. The Internet that he posted his blog on. Maybe it just might help the economy come out of recession? Science works because it delivers and the funding is there because people know that.

noibl 14y ago
> I stopped reading here Which the rest of your comment proves. Thanks for that.
- CamperBob2 14y ago
  (Shrug) Burying the lede has its risks. If you don't want to lose your readers, don't waste their time.
  - noibl 14y ago
    Presumably, the commenter I replied to was able to read this part, since it comes just before the line they quoted: In the modern world, science, technology and reason are central and vital, and this is widely recognised So I don't see how you can say that anything was buried. Also, to disengage as a reader is one thing. To take the time to then comment on what one hasn't read, misstating the author's point-of-view and encouraging others not to read, on the basis of one's own lazy misunderstanding, is just wilfully spreading ignorance.
  - thaumaturgy 14y ago
    The author did not, by definition, bury the lede. It was an overall well-written, and mostly well-argued, 30-minute read. That may be greater than your current attention span, but you shouldn't presume that it's wasting anyone else's time.
  - ktizo 14y ago
    Burying the lede is applicable to journalism, this is an essay. It is not a news report about some singular pertinent factoid that can somehow be buried. And if you want to count yourself as a reader whose time has been wasted, then spend time reading the thing, so that your complaint can then make some kind of sense.
philwelch 14y ago
> I stopped reading here: Then please don't comment. It's considered customary not to discuss something you haven't thoroughly read; you're practically advertising that your comment adds nothing to the discussion.

noibl 14y ago

> I stopped reading here Which the rest of your comment proves. Thanks for that.

CamperBob2 14y ago
(Shrug) Burying the lede has its risks. If you don't want to lose your readers, don't waste their time.
- noibl 14y ago
  Presumably, the commenter I replied to was able to read this part, since it comes just before the line they quoted: In the modern world, science, technology and reason are central and vital, and this is widely recognised So I don't see how you can say that anything was buried. Also, to disengage as a reader is one thing. To take the time to then comment on what one hasn't read, misstating the author's point-of-view and encouraging others not to read, on the basis of one's own lazy misunderstanding, is just wilfully spreading ignorance.
- thaumaturgy 14y ago
  The author did not, by definition, bury the lede. It was an overall well-written, and mostly well-argued, 30-minute read. That may be greater than your current attention span, but you shouldn't presume that it's wasting anyone else's time.
- ktizo 14y ago
  Burying the lede is applicable to journalism, this is an essay. It is not a news report about some singular pertinent factoid that can somehow be buried. And if you want to count yourself as a reader whose time has been wasted, then spend time reading the thing, so that your complaint can then make some kind of sense.

philwelch 14y ago

> I stopped reading here: Then please don't comment. It's considered customary not to discuss something you haven't thoroughly read; you're practically advertising that your comment adds nothing to the discussion.