[dang]

This comment violates the HN guidelines. We don't want ideological battle here (not to mention low-rent rants). That's not because we're capitalist pigs or socialist moochers; it's because it's all repetitive and therefore boring, and it leads directly to flamewar. All scorched earth is the same.

You've been posting a lot of this for a long time. We ban accounts that do that, so I've banned this one. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email [e-mail] and give us reason to believe that you'll use the site as intended. In the meantime, would you please not create accounts to break HN's rules with?

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[goliatone]

I don’t have a bone to pick in this back and forth, however there’s something I don’t fully understand from dang’s comment: what does “low-rent rant” mean? Never heard the expression before and I don’t know if it’s a pun to the subject of the article or something else entirely referencing the tone of the OP’s comment.

[dang]

By "low-rent" I just mean easy, cheap, and of dubious value.

[fipple]

Except for the first line it is a fairly interesting comment.

[dang]

Perhaps I'm missing something, but it reads like a predictable rant to me, the kind of comment that destroys thoughtful discussion rather than supports it. That goes against the kind of website we want HN to be. Of course a good paint-stripping rant can be great fun (or outraging, a variant of the same), and there are other kinds of website for that.

Plenty of kinds of critique don't have this effect, and most HN users have no trouble practicing them—it's mostly just a question of wanting to.