5 ms·
> And part of why I ended up skimming the piece is that I'm not convinced original post can be interpreted to that degree. Not to interject -- well, ok, to int
by jfarmer 13y ago
> And part of why I ended up skimming the piece is that I'm not convinced original post can be interpreted to that degree.
Not to interject -- well, ok, to interject -- but isn't this completely backwards? Shouldn't you skim articles you mostly agree with, but read more intensely those you disagree with? You get less out of the former and probably know what they'll say, regardless.
- jerf 13y agoI read the first couple of pages intensely, came to that conclusion, skimmed the rest for why I might be wrong. Fair question.
- jtheory 13y agoI had the same response. It's not about agreeing or not -- there's no point to reading an opinion piece that covers my opinion plus my rationale -- rather, it's about assessing the quality of the arguments as you go. I started reading, was put off by the snark and sarcasm (snark is occasionally entertaining; this wasn't), then I got to where the author was baffled that Meyer described Yahoo's identity in positive terms. Really? I skimmed a bit after that then wrote it off as a waste of time.