[omoikane]

The HN audience seem to encourage this type of comment by consistently upvoting them, like how the current top comment is one that complains about tracking due to embedded video as opposed to something that is materially related to the site contents.

I will do my part by upvoting the other comments, but judging by the karma ranking and comment history of some of these commenters, I think I am in the minority.

[fngjdflmdflg]

>by consistently upvoting them

My comment is actually downvoted at -3 points currently. As for the top comment, I don't see the issue with pointing out that the site is enabling the tracking of users when it claims not to, especially since it is directly related to the topic of the site itself. I don't think being unconditionally positive is in line with the site's goal of promoting "intellectual curiosity."

>judging by the karma ranking and comment history of some of these commenters

That top comment is from John Nagle of Nagle's algorithm. I doubt his karma is from being negative.

[lmm]

> That top comment is from John Nagle of Nagle's algorithm. I doubt his karma is from being negative.

A relentless cynicism and the willingness to shoot down bad ideas are vital for producing anything worthwhile. Someone who was able to improve real-world networking is very likely to have been "negative" by modern standards.

[athrun]

I'm not sure I agree relentless cynicism is productive. Skepticism yes, that's very healthy.

But unchecked cynicism tends to result in a general lack of trust that is not very conducive to progress.

[fngjdflmdflg]

Good point. By "negative" there I meant unhelpfully negative.

[Bluestein]

> I don't see the issue with pointing out that the site is enabling the tracking of users when it claims not to,

Which, in a sense ends up being anímical the ethos at hand, with many blogfolk now securing their own sites, with a nice, ongoing discussion about many technical options to achieve that. Sounds like a good outcome.-