dang

53 ms·

661.
by dang 4mo ago
(probably just a mistake. I moved the parent to the toplevel now.)
662.
by dang 4mo ago
Ok, let's go with 2019!
663.
by dang 4mo ago
And https://web.archive.org/web/20260000000000*/https://www.outs... seems to suggest 2021. I guess we'll put that above, although we had 2019 in the 2022 thread ( https://news.ycombinator.
664.
by dang 4mo ago
" Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. " " Don't be snarky. " https://news.ycombinator.com&#x
665.
by dang 4mo ago
Related: Current guidelines for sun exposure are unhealthy and unscientific – research (2019) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31471416 - May 2022 (335 comments)
666.
by dang 4mo ago
Thanks! We've changed the URL above to jump to that section (submitted URL was https://www.savingourstars.org/darkskylighting ).
667.
by dang 4mo ago
Ok, let's use that and put the other two in the toptext.
668.
by dang 4mo ago
Comments moved to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48706389 .
669.
by dang 4mo ago
Of course we wouldn't rate limit you, or anyone else, for an innocuous comment. We rate limited you because of flamewar comments you posted in another thread, like this one: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48723651
670.
by dang 4mo ago
Yikes, you broke the site guidelines badly with this post. Could you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to them? You're welcome to make your substantive points thoughtfully, just n
671.
by dang 4mo ago
Well, if you expect us to see everything you see which deserves moderator attention, it amounts to the same thing - since "you" here means every user (obviously you're not just asking for yourself personally). That's wha
672.
by dang 4mo ago
Please follow the site guidelines, no matter how wrong someone is or you feel they are. You may not owe people who you feel are wrong better, but you owe this community better if you're participating in it. https://news.ycom
673.
by dang 4mo ago
Please follow the site guidelines, no matter how wrong someone is or you feel they are. You may not owe people who you feel are wrong better, but you owe this community better if you're participating in it. https://news.ycom
674.
by dang 4mo ago
You've both broken the site guidelines badly in this thread, not just in this tit-for-tat spat but generally. Please don't perpetuate flamewars on this site. Please do review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidel
675.
by dang 4mo ago
You've both broken the site guidelines badly in this thread, not just in this tit-for-tat spat but generally. Please don't perpetuate flamewars on this site. Please do review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidel
676.
by dang 4mo ago
We try to draw the line according to principles that I've explained many times over the years. If you scroll back through the comments, for example, at https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&a
677.
by dang 4mo ago
The guidelines say that most political articles are offtopic. Most != all. The question is what should be in the setdiff of all - most. About that, there are lots of past explanations: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all
678.
by dang 4mo ago
Of course we do: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html . Don't make the mistake of assuming moderator omniscience ( https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... )
679.
by dang 4mo ago
We've banned this account for posting flamewar comments and ignoring our request to stop. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the ru
680.
by dang 4mo ago
Can you please not post in the flamewar style? You crossed into that here and it's the opposite of what we're trying for on this site. You're welcome to make your substantive points thoughtfully. https://news.ycom
681.
by dang 4mo ago
Religious flamewar is not allowed on HN so please don't post like this here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
682.
by dang 4mo ago
See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48721551 and let us know if you have any questions. (aftbit already mentioned this link downthread but perhaps it's helpful to say this explicitly.) Edit: actually I should prob
683.
by dang 4mo ago
What has been removed? The links I saw didn't have much information but as far as I can tell they're still up. From an HN point of view the idea is to give the discussion a place, since the community obviously wants to have it.
684.
by dang 4mo ago
Comments moved to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48717469 , which is currently on the frontpage.
685.
by dang 4mo ago
Thanks, we'll merge that thread hither.
686.
by dang 4mo ago
There have been multiple posts about this and hundreds of comments, so there is clearly appetite to discuss it, although none of the submitted links have been very detailed. I've merged the other threads into this one, so you'll s
687.
by dang 4mo ago
Comments moved to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48717469 .
688.
by dang 4mo ago
I don't think it would help: most people wouldn't know about it, of those who did many wouldn't conform, and there would be no reliable way to enforce it.
689.
by dang 4mo ago
HN uses the canonical URL when it finds one and that was https://bugzmanov.github.io/cleancode-critique/ in this case. Fixed now!
690.
by dang 4mo ago
Comments moved thither. Thanks! (Not the submitter's fault since the URLs were different)

More ›