3 ms·

> ...but how exactly is it interesting or relevant in a discussion about their response to patent trolls? Another comment on this thread simply states "Newegg

> ...but how exactly is it interesting or relevant in a discussion about their response to patent trolls? Another comment on this thread simply states "Newegg is my hero!". How come you're not lecturing that commentator? I found joshjdr's comment relevant. From my years on Hacker News, I've never had the impression that every comment was directly relevant to the posted link. Most of the time someone leaves a comments that off-topic like joshjdr. Many people respond and sometimes a giant thread emerges. Those uninterested simply move on.

lotharbot 12y ago
> "How come you're not lecturing that commentator?" joshjdr indicated that he wanted to understand the negative response his comment was generating. I provided him with an explanation; this is a service many HN commenters have expressed appreciation for in the past. The other guy made no such indication, so I gave him a downvote without explanation. > "I've never had the impression that every comment was directly relevant to the posted link." Perhaps my explanation was less clear than I hoped. The HN community has certain expectations for comment quality. Generally speaking, the less directly relevant a comment is, the more of some other positive quality it needs to have in order to be well-received. "Newegg really screwed up something unrelated to patent trolling" is both tangential and unenlightening.
Goronmon 12y ago
It's in the context of what the original link is about. In your example: Another comment on this thread simply states "Newegg is my hero!". How come you're not lecturing that commentator? "Newegg is my hero" is a comment stating that the user likes Newegg because of what is being described in the link. While not extremely useful, the comment is directly related to the subject being discussed. Whereas, "I don't like Newegg because they screwed up a return." is both not useful and also has nothing to do with the topic being discussed. It has as much to do with the story as "I don't like Newegg because an employee once cut me off on the highway." Not to mention that with sites like HN, it gets old fast when people use every mention of certain subjects/people/companies as a catalyst to air any unrelated grievances they have just because. Imagine (this is a fictitious scenario) that joshjdr reposted his original comment in every thread mentioning Newegg, regardless of context. That sort of stuff can be frustrating to wade through regularly so people tend to react poorly to comments that appear similar in nature.

lotharbot 12y ago

> "How come you're not lecturing that commentator?" joshjdr indicated that he wanted to understand the negative response his comment was generating. I provided him with an explanation; this is a service many HN commenters have expressed appreciation for in the past. The other guy made no such indication, so I gave him a downvote without explanation. > "I've never had the impression that every comment was directly relevant to the posted link." Perhaps my explanation was less clear than I hoped. The HN community has certain expectations for comment quality. Generally speaking, the less directly relevant a comment is, the more of some other positive quality it needs to have in order to be well-received. "Newegg really screwed up something unrelated to patent trolling" is both tangential and unenlightening.

Goronmon 12y ago

It's in the context of what the original link is about. In your example: Another comment on this thread simply states "Newegg is my hero!". How come you're not lecturing that commentator? "Newegg is my hero" is a comment stating that the user likes Newegg because of what is being described in the link. While not extremely useful, the comment is directly related to the subject being discussed. Whereas, "I don't like Newegg because they screwed up a return." is both not useful and also has nothing to do with the topic being discussed. It has as much to do with the story as "I don't like Newegg because an employee once cut me off on the highway." Not to mention that with sites like HN, it gets old fast when people use every mention of certain subjects/people/companies as a catalyst to air any unrelated grievances they have just because. Imagine (this is a fictitious scenario) that joshjdr reposted his original comment in every thread mentioning Newegg, regardless of context. That sort of stuff can be frustrating to wade through regularly so people tend to react poorly to comments that appear similar in nature.