4 ms·

Original discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7244605 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7244605 (incidentally, submitted by the same person)

• benesch 13y ago
  As you pointed out, the previous discussion linked to a secondary source, not the original article. Also, one comment hardly constitutes a discussion.
  • deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
• ColinWright 13y ago
  Yes. Having come across it I submitted that, and then someone pointed out the original source, so I submitted that instead (here). Now that original submission is dead. For completeness, the one comment on that first submission was by compare[0] saying: The list sounds more predictive than descriptive. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=compare https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=compare
  • mindcrime 13y ago
    Having come across it I submitted that, and then someone pointed out the original source, so I submitted that instead Why?
    • ColinWright 13y ago
      Not sure I understand your question. The guidelines[0] say: Please submit the original source. If a blog post reports on something they found on another site, submit the latter. Having realized that what I'd submitted wasn't the original source I attempted to correct that oversight. Just seemed the right thing to do. [0] http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
      • mindcrime 13y ago
        Personally, I don't really care about the guidelines all the time. If you take that overly literally, then nobody could submit anything that referred to something else via a link. I get the need to eliminate outright "blogspam" but not everything that comments on "something else" is blogspam. If somebody reports on something and adds useful commentary, insight, whatever, I don't see the point in insisting on some arbitrary standard of "only link to most upstream source". It's not like people aren't capable of following links.