3 ms·
Your post title doesn't sound like spam to me. Moreover, the link you originally shared https://pragprog.com/titles/rshaskell/effective-haskell/ https://pragpro
by hitekker 9mo ago
Your post title doesn't sound like spam to me. Moreover, the link you originally shared https://pragprog.com/titles/rshaskell/effective-haskell/ https://pragprog.com/titles/rshaskell/effective-haskell/ looks informative enough for discussion; it links to PDFs of the actual content to read. HN, for example, didn't delete it when you posted it https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36987260 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36987260
IMO, the lobste.rs admin's assertion that the post had "nothing to discuss" is a misjudgment that undercuts the rest of their rationalization. My guess is that they're looking for a win on technicality, instead of addressing the myriad of concerns raised elsewhere in this thread.
- pushcx 9mo agoThe link was https://effective-haskell.com/ https://effective-haskell.com/
- hitekker 9mo agoThat website was actually https://web.archive.org/web/20230804152033/https://effective-haskell.com/ https://web.archive.org/web/20230804152033/https://effective... back in 2023. Even less sale-sy than the HN link. I don't think the technical win you want is possible or even worth it.
- pushcx 9mo agoI don't know why you think I want a "technical win" from you, but I'm not seeking your approval. I corrected your mistake about the URL and the policy, like I corrected the author's mistake about what I removed. If you and other sites prefer different policies, it's no skin off my nose.