3 ms·

> I don't claim to understand anything until I can put it in my own words. Are you implying that the previous poster does not understand the issue if they chos

> I don't claim to understand anything until I can put it in my own words. Are you implying that the previous poster does not understand the issue if they chose not to state it in their own words? If not, this sentence seems out of place.

SilasX 12y ago
I'm saying it's very rude to "choose not to state it" in your own words if you already understand it, since it would be a trivial step to write a few sentences and save thousands of people from reading 30 pages just learn what the core argument is and whether the it's worth reading further. Given that "90% of everything is crap", people need a little more to go on than "Cool new argument that demolishes the nothing-to-hide point. The NSA hates it!"
- seanflyon 12y ago
  That is an interesting point of view. My friends often send me links to articles, without writing summaries and for me, the recommendation alone is enough to get me to at least glance at the article. I know that they would not send me the link if the article was not interesting and well reasoned. I guess it all depends on how much you respect your friends.
  - SilasX 12y ago
    This wasn't a recommendation to a specific friend with a track record, but thousands of random people.
    - mkal_tsr 12y ago
      > This wasn't a recommendation to a specific friend with a track record, but thousands of random people. Really? None of my Facebook friends are random people to me. Nor did I have thousands of people on my Facebook account. Please quote the exact number of friends I had on my profile, as well as the full-text of my sign-off message. I'll wait patiently. > I linked my friends to his paper "I’ve Got Nothing To Hide’ and Other Misunderstandings of Privacy" [1] when I was closing down my Facebook and other social network sites; Weird how my HN account is not closed and I never told anyone on HN that they should read it. It's almost like I made a comment that was relevant to the author of the linked article (a paper by the same author that expands upon the limited scope of the article) that concerned something between my friends and I and included the link to the paper that I had also mentioned. But thank you for being so invested and concerned about what happens between my friends and I. Have a good day :-)
      - SilasX 12y ago
        Slow down. I was talking about your implicit recommendation of the article here. And yes, what you said counts as such. (Of course, if never tell my friends to read 30 pages without some idea of what they'd be getting but whatever.) If you really understand the core argument, what is so hard about giving a short summary?
        mkal_tsr 12y ago
        > If you really understand the core argument, what is so hard about giving a short summary? Because this was never about me wanting or offering to give a summary, just an anecdote that the author of the article had also written something I had linked my friends to, nothing more. It was the responses that made me dig my heels in and be stubborn/pedantic.

SilasX 12y ago

I'm saying it's very rude to "choose not to state it" in your own words if you already understand it, since it would be a trivial step to write a few sentences and save thousands of people from reading 30 pages just learn what the core argument is and whether the it's worth reading further. Given that "90% of everything is crap", people need a little more to go on than "Cool new argument that demolishes the nothing-to-hide point. The NSA hates it!"

seanflyon 12y ago
That is an interesting point of view. My friends often send me links to articles, without writing summaries and for me, the recommendation alone is enough to get me to at least glance at the article. I know that they would not send me the link if the article was not interesting and well reasoned. I guess it all depends on how much you respect your friends.
- SilasX 12y ago
  This wasn't a recommendation to a specific friend with a track record, but thousands of random people.
  - mkal_tsr 12y ago
    > This wasn't a recommendation to a specific friend with a track record, but thousands of random people. Really? None of my Facebook friends are random people to me. Nor did I have thousands of people on my Facebook account. Please quote the exact number of friends I had on my profile, as well as the full-text of my sign-off message. I'll wait patiently. > I linked my friends to his paper "I’ve Got Nothing To Hide’ and Other Misunderstandings of Privacy" [1] when I was closing down my Facebook and other social network sites; Weird how my HN account is not closed and I never told anyone on HN that they should read it. It's almost like I made a comment that was relevant to the author of the linked article (a paper by the same author that expands upon the limited scope of the article) that concerned something between my friends and I and included the link to the paper that I had also mentioned. But thank you for being so invested and concerned about what happens between my friends and I. Have a good day :-)
    - SilasX 12y ago
      Slow down. I was talking about your implicit recommendation of the article here. And yes, what you said counts as such. (Of course, if never tell my friends to read 30 pages without some idea of what they'd be getting but whatever.) If you really understand the core argument, what is so hard about giving a short summary?
      - mkal_tsr 12y ago
        > If you really understand the core argument, what is so hard about giving a short summary? Because this was never about me wanting or offering to give a summary, just an anecdote that the author of the article had also written something I had linked my friends to, nothing more. It was the responses that made me dig my heels in and be stubborn/pedantic.