4 ms·
http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html Look under DH2. I didn't find his tone offensive at all, esp as a piece of wri
by iamwil 14y ago
http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html
Look under DH2.
I didn't find his tone offensive at all, esp as a piece of writing. It's likely that he hears "DOM is slow" all the time, and is venting. And he's a far cry from Zed Shaw's kind of writing.
- otikik 14y agoConsider that the OP itself is already disagreeing with something (the assertion "DOM is slow"). If we apply the rules of your link to the OP, it doesn't even get pass DH1 (the title is already a name call, and later on it uses others).
- ender7 14y ago“I’m too stupid to know that what I’m doing is stupid” I agree that the OP's smartass writing style is more annoying than anything else, but I really didn't like the quoted phrase above. Calling someone stupid because they don't know the ins and outs of what is, let's face it, a particularly byzantine system, is just, well...mean. However, if you'd prefer a critique on the substance of the actual article, I have one of those, too: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5401340 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5401340
- dclowd9901 14y agoLook at DH4. He's saying it's more difficult to convince people of your point if you're being a dick about it. You aren't arguing the central point of his thesis, so I'm unsure what exactly your point is in regards to OP. As far as I know, PG's post doesn't apply to the original article, as the article starts the discussion, rather than responds to one.
- collypops 14y agoThis discussion has being going on for a very long time, even on HN. The article is very much a response to what has come before it. Sure it's a starting point for a thread of discussion we're having here, but it's by no means the _start_ of the debate.