3 ms·
Nothing like a bunch of comments tearing apart a website built by people who, presumably, learned to code a few months ago and threw it together over the course
by ctide 13y ago
Nothing like a bunch of comments tearing apart a website built by people who, presumably, learned to code a few months ago and threw it together over the course of a few weeks. Yeah, it has a few issues, but it's significantly better than the first things I ever built and sent off to the world.
Keep it classy, HN.
- scholia 13y agoIt's fundamentally horrible. The whole design approach is horrible. It's the contemporary equivalent of GeoCities, just using more recent but equally mindless design cliches. In fact, it's so horrible it makes PowerPoint look good.
- shawndrost 13y ago(For parties that wanted to downvote this comment more than once: you can do so by clicking "link", then clicking "flag".)
- MichaelApproved 13y agoFrom your profile: "Cofounder of a dev training program called Hack Reactor" Hacker Reactor is where this website originated from and you're behaving this way? You've been a HNer for over 2,000 days. You should know better.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- foobarbazqux 13y agoYour criticism is fundamentally horrible. The whole rhetorical approach is horrible. It's the contemporary equivalent of a flame on USENET, just using more recent but equally mindless rhetorical cliches. In fact, it's so horrible it makes YouTube comments look good.
- scholia 13y agoRhetoric goes back centuries so it's unlikely I've come up with anything new. Otherwise, it contains genuine criticism that is rarely found in YouTube comments. The site is a patchwork of trendy design cliches that make the information less accessible than it would be in, for example, PowerPoint. And what we know about the mindless use of design cliches (see GeoCities) is that they date badly. In sum, I think my complaint has more to it than your parodic reply. There is in fact a more sensible response above: "We are aware of a lot of the issues on the home page and plan to completely redesign it soon."
- foobarbazqux 13y agoGenuine criticism would simply explain the design cliches you didn't like and move on. Calling something horrible is not effective criticism. You're a horrible person! How are you meant to grow out of that? Comparisons to GeoCities and PowerPoint without explaining yourself are not doing much either. The point of criticism is that you give something actually useful to the person you are criticizing. Unless your goal is simply to put down the other party. It's a cliche to just dismiss something out of hand, the same way I dismissed your arguments without justifying myself. The reason I replied like that was to demonstrate how fill in the blanks things were. You cannot do that with real criticism. For example, this critique of your rhetorical cliches could not be applied to the website in question.
- scholia 13y agoI was being brief. The average HN user is easily smart enough to get the point. And at least it addressed the point at issue, which made it more of a contribution than your content-free response. By the way, you're also ignoring the original context. Anybody trying to offer helpful criticism surely wouldn't have done that, would they?
- foobarbazqux 13y agoSorry, I genuinely don't understand. How am I ignoring the original context (in my followup reply)? I'll agree that my response was content-free. It was even aggressively hostile, and I could have been kinder about it. I'm sure that it was not fun to have someone flagrantly mocking your words.
- freehunter 13y agoWhat's the point in submitting this to HN if not to get feedback?
- g0lden 13y agoto get mindful feedback.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- ineedtosleep 13y agoExamples of "tearing apart"? At its worst, the feedback is terse. If all one wants are warm and fuzzies, one wouldn't submit here.
- gdi2290 13y agoConstructive feedback rather than warm fuzzies are suggested.