5 ms·
Ugh. Why is this on hacker news? I can see the original video being an intellectual curiosity. But commentary and more commentary on top of that? What does this
by tedks 12y ago
Ugh. Why is this on hacker news? I can see the original video being an intellectual curiosity. But commentary and more commentary on top of that? What does this add?
I really could not care less about this entire thing. I didn't even watch the original video (who has time for ELEVEN MINUTES of bow shooting!?). I hope this trend dies fast.
- jdmichal 12y agoHeaven forbid the discussion of something extend beyond the local and temporal realm of its submission on HN...
- NoMoreNicksLeft 12y agoGood commentary is more valuable than the original content. Bad commentary is worth less than horse shit. And when I say "horse shit" I mean small smelly smears of it, because bulk horse shit does have value. Guess what sort yours is.
- taeric 12y agoThis makes little sense. If you could see the original, then the followons make just as much sense. For myself, this post was just as much fun, if only for the links to more archery stuff on youtube.
- tedks 12y agoThat approach doesn't scale. Does mildly appreciating a skim of an archery blog post and clicking through a video mean that I need to skim EVERY archery related blog post and video? Where does it end? If someone links an engaging blog post on knitting do I have to go out and buy yarn?
- taeric 12y agoNo approach scales. Bitching that the collective vote here doesn't match your personal preference, though, is just silly.