3 ms·

WHO IS UPVOTING THIS PREDICTABLY NEGATIVE SHIT ON HN? What is this? How does this happen? I'm just stunned. Every single time. It's never even the "that's aweso

WHO IS UPVOTING THIS PREDICTABLY NEGATIVE SHIT ON HN? What is this? How does this happen? I'm just stunned. Every single time. It's never even the "that's awesome! Keep in mind, there's this additional context" posts, it's just the "this isn't actually awesome, here's why" posts. NO. It's awesome that a private company sold stock that is hot because they're doing well to pay back public debt. Good for fucking them. People wanted to buy it because they see it as valuable, and they paid back the American people with some of that money. Good for them, period.

csense 13y ago
> WHO IS UPVOTING THIS PREDICTABLY NEGATIVE SHIT ON HN? People who are interested in views that are contrary to the mainstream and don't want HN to become an echo chamber. People who value critical, insightful analysis and discussion by people who are willing to question the "party line" of a particular product's marketing department and fan club. People who don't care about catering to the whims of people who can't stand to read "negative" things on the internet. > NEGATIVE SHIT I question this characterization of noname123's comment. The third paragraph I read as healthy skepticism, not negativity for its own sake. It's certainly information that a responsible investor would want to carefully consider. The comment certainly wasn't "shit," it was well-thought-out and informative. The commenter certainly did his homework.
- tomasien 13y ago
  HN needs to not be an echo chamber, but the comment sections are becoming the opposite. If you're trying to justify a really pedantic but generally uniformative post (you say it's informative - how? I suppose you could have missed the 10 earlier HN threads about the stock sale, but it wasn't unknown info) by its third paragraph being healthily skeptical I think you're losing steam. The problem isn't pointing out these facts - it's framing them as THE narrative and in a purely negative light.

csense 13y ago

> WHO IS UPVOTING THIS PREDICTABLY NEGATIVE SHIT ON HN? People who are interested in views that are contrary to the mainstream and don't want HN to become an echo chamber. People who value critical, insightful analysis and discussion by people who are willing to question the "party line" of a particular product's marketing department and fan club. People who don't care about catering to the whims of people who can't stand to read "negative" things on the internet. > NEGATIVE SHIT I question this characterization of noname123's comment. The third paragraph I read as healthy skepticism, not negativity for its own sake. It's certainly information that a responsible investor would want to carefully consider. The comment certainly wasn't "shit," it was well-thought-out and informative. The commenter certainly did his homework.

tomasien 13y ago
HN needs to not be an echo chamber, but the comment sections are becoming the opposite. If you're trying to justify a really pedantic but generally uniformative post (you say it's informative - how? I suppose you could have missed the 10 earlier HN threads about the stock sale, but it wasn't unknown info) by its third paragraph being healthily skeptical I think you're losing steam. The problem isn't pointing out these facts - it's framing them as THE narrative and in a purely negative light.