[lcnPylGDnU4H9OF]

Obviously I'd only be able to say for sure if I was the downvoter but I sometimes observe lighter text on comments which make a reference without calling out the reference. It's similar to using an acronym without defining it, though possibly more confounding if it's a niche enough reference. In this case, I did not get the reference and would have wondered why the parent commenter expected that title to have already been used.

At best, such a comment is referencing something topical which most readers will get (and ostensibly be entertained by); at worst, it's a distracting non sequitur. It generally ties back to a community preference that comments are curiosity-satisfying before entertaining.

[lbrindze]

Wouldn’t an allusion to 20th century American poetry fall into the category of “curiosity satisfying”? Given they were not the only person who got the reference it feels kind of arbitrary to say this is frivolous entertainment when another person in the community (in this case, me) found it curious and also wondered if there was an allusion there.

If it was an intentional allusion, then it may actually add depth/meaning to the conversation but we may not know since it was already downvoted…

[lcnPylGDnU4H9OF]

It could be if it was called out as such. Without the explicit callout, one runs the risk of it “going over the readers’ heads” so to speak. Anyway, I’m not intending to justify any behavior; just offering my interpretation based on past observations.

[nickpeterson]

Humor on HN has to thread a needle. I take a lot of shots even though they often don’t work out. As an AI language model it’s a risk I take.