[mindcrime]

This whole article seems like it must be an elaborate HN Karma Lottery, where the first person to read the headline then post the above comment will immediately walk away with 300 points.

LOL... it's so funny you would say that. I was thinking last night, after this comment started getting upvoted like mad, how pathetic it is that this comment, which is basically just an emotionally charged rant, gets massive upvotes, while my much better comments - the ones full of research, thoughtful commentary, links, etc., - languish with no upvotes. I mean, I stand behind the above comment 100%, and would repeat it today. But it isn't a particularly good comment. There's nothing actionable in it, and nobody learns anything new from reading it, except for "Phil thinks $BLAH". sigh

[ultramundane8]

I often observe the same thing.

I consider myself the lowest of the low, and even I am disappointed by 9/10 HN posts hiding their valuable comments (they do exist) far below the first thing that I see on my web browser.

Self-indulgent comments like yours and mine should be ignored, not upvoted.

[flixic]

It would be very difficult to find, but John Siracusa has said the same thing when asked which of his Hypercritical episodes were his favorites. In short, he explained why he thinks some of his more emotional episodes were very popular, while actually good, well researched weren't, and that people like to like things that inspire discussion and feelings about things they already know and feel something about, not well researched new material. I may be recalling the whole idea bit incorrectly, but there was a similar angle to it as well.