11 ms·

Thanks for the comment. I'm fairly certain cursing isn't necessary. I'm not attempting to rebut every comment, simply making statements. Its all in opinion. I a

Thanks for the comment. I'm fairly certain cursing isn't necessary. I'm not attempting to rebut every comment, simply making statements. Its all in opinion. I agree with your statement as well. These monetization schemes will never go anywhere. They're very successful.

Mz 13y ago
Let me put that another way: Do yourself a favor and shut up and let other people talk about what you wrote. I'm done here. I doubt you can be clued.
- girvo 13y ago
  He replied... twice? How is that something that requires you to attack him? This is HN, and someone like yourself is well aware that sort of comment you tacked on the end of a good comment isn't welcome here, and the ad hominem above isn't either. I'm just trying to work out what I'm missing here, seemed rather out of the blue :/
  - Mz 13y ago
    What you are missing is that he replied fairly promptly to the first three replies here, including mine in spite of me commenting in advance that there would be more discussion if he did not do that. This is likely part of why it was not generating discussion. (Please note that people are now spending more time talking to me about my presumed "attack" than talking about his article. So I stand by my observation.) I was trying to be helpful, which is likely a mistake, for a lot of reasons.
    - girvo 13y ago
      I'm not missing that, that is exactly what I said. There was two replies, and a reply to you unless those replies and the parents were deleted without a trace... I fully understand being helpful, but foul language and dismissiveness isn't really okay here normally; you've been here far longer than I have, and I respect your comments normally, just seemed a bit odd is all. shrugs
- jamesk_au 13y ago
  Still no need for cursing, or for ad hominem remarks. HN is at its best when this does not occur.

11 ms·

Thanks for the comment. I'm fairly certain cursing isn't necessary. I'm not attempting to rebut every comment, simply making statements. Its all in opinion. I a

by donnfelker 13y ago

Mz 13y ago
Let me put that another way: Do yourself a favor and shut up and let other people talk about what you wrote. I'm done here. I doubt you can be clued.
- girvo 13y ago
  He replied... twice? How is that something that requires you to attack him? This is HN, and someone like yourself is well aware that sort of comment you tacked on the end of a good comment isn't welcome here, and the ad hominem above isn't either. I'm just trying to work out what I'm missing here, seemed rather out of the blue :/
  - Mz 13y ago
    What you are missing is that he replied fairly promptly to the first three replies here, including mine in spite of me commenting in advance that there would be more discussion if he did not do that. This is likely part of why it was not generating discussion. (Please note that people are now spending more time talking to me about my presumed "attack" than talking about his article. So I stand by my observation.) I was trying to be helpful, which is likely a mistake, for a lot of reasons.
    - girvo 13y ago
      I'm not missing that, that is exactly what I said. There was two replies, and a reply to you unless those replies and the parents were deleted without a trace... I fully understand being helpful, but foul language and dismissiveness isn't really okay here normally; you've been here far longer than I have, and I respect your comments normally, just seemed a bit odd is all. shrugs
- jamesk_au 13y ago
  Still no need for cursing, or for ad hominem remarks. HN is at its best when this does not occur.