My intention was to be friendly, at least at the end.
I characterize it as fulminating due to the use of capitalization (which is specifically against the guidelines), along with an overall belligerent tone.
It’s just not a cutthroat enough topic to get too insistent about. We can discuss these things in a conversational style, which is what HN is meant to be for.
Edit: I see from looking over your comments in the thread that you have a personal connection to ARPANET and Vint Cerf. That’s great and we sincerely appreciate you sharing your personal insights here. We just really want HN to be a place for curious conversation rather than belligerence, which is how your first reply came across. I can understand it may not have seemed that way to you when you wrote it and I’m sorry if there’s been a misunderstanding.
Is capitalizing TFA, TCP/IP, URL, or ARPANET also against the rules?
Hey just joking ... I had no idea that using capitalization for emphasis is against the guidelines ... I think it's quite a stretch to characterize it as "fulminating" or "bellerigent". In the future I will write known as ... I hope italics are not also against the guidelines. (Is my snark "belligerent"? I think it's just conversational.)
> It’s just not a cutthroat enough topic to get too insistent about. We can discuss these things in a conversational style, which is what HN is meant to be for.
Seriously? For a mod you don't seem very familiar with the place. 99% of posts are "insistent" and the person I responded to (as well as yourself) are quite insistent (and belligent--considerably more so than I, IMO). And someone can be insistent "in a conversational style", whatever the eff that means ... and "cutthroat enough topic" isn't even coherent--a category mistake. I was simply presenting a counterargument to a title change that no longer reflected TFA. Frankly I think this is complete bullpucky ... belligent mod-privileged bullpucky. Again, less hostility and belligerence and more charity, please. Moderation shouldn't include characterizing people as "fulminating" or "overly belligerent", especially on such flimsy grounds -- that's pretty effing belligerent which a rational person might expect to raise defensive emotions in the person it is directed at, and with all the insistence and belligerence all over this site (have you seen all the belligerent insistent claims that people are using AI to write their posts? those accusations are turning this place to crap more than the actual use of AI is but they not only aren't moderated against, they are implicitly encouraged) it comes across as personal, immoderate, and lacking evenhandedness.
The title of your second link is "The Fathers of the Internet" and Robert Kahn as co-inventor of TCP/IP protocol is also considered a father of the internet.
BTW if I google father of the internet I get Cerf and Kahn or it says "a father"
I know what the title says, of course ... but the title is descriptive, not a label, and only Cerf is referred to as the father, as quoted. And yes of course Kahn co-invented TCP/IP but no one ever calls him father of the Internet. And I already said what happens if you google "father of the Internet" -- what I said is actually true.
And none of this is really relevant because it's TFA that should determine HN titles. But for better or worse the mod has made his decision, so this is moot -- I won't comment on it further.
And man, for someone who calls something "nitpicking" to dig so deep into it ...
I'm reading "where the wizards stay up late", and I was thinking the same thing. It's difficult to keep track of who is who but I'm pretty certain Cerf has appeared yet. I'm not that far through.