3 ms·
This comment has even lower nutritional value. It's just a "dislike" with more words. You could have offered your counterarguments or if you're too tired of it
by bonoboTP 9mo ago
This comment has even lower nutritional value. It's just a "dislike" with more words. You could have offered your counterarguments or if you're too tired of it but still feel you need to be heard, you could have linked to a previous comment or post of yours.
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- rTX5CMRXIfFG 9mo agoI mean, are you gonna die on a hill defending every low-quality content in HN? Because I think it’s perfectly OK to call it out so that moderators can notice and improve. You seem to think that readers have an inherent responsibility to salvage someone else’s bad article.
- bonoboTP 9mo agoIt's the top comment. But I'll disengage as this gets too meta. I'd encourage talking about the substance.
- abcde666777 9mo agoWell, I didn't articulate it but behind my comment was a question - who's actually upvoting this stuff and why? To me the claim of the article was silly on the surface of it, silly enough that I was surprised that folks consider it worthy of discussion. Is there just a large number of upvoters here without even a basic understanding of the topic at hand? Or is there some other explanation beyond that?
- bonoboTP 9mo agoHacker news is a bit different from Reddit or other social media. This is a good summary, especially the section titled "Comments". https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Edit: I notice I'm talking to a 2 week old account, I should've checked before engaging.
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]