I hold precisely the opposite opinion. (How's that for HN-sanctioned "YOU'RE WRONG!"?)
The poster is doubtful "an idiot" for posting something that is a serious attempt at solving spam. Sure the idea won't work, but if coming up with a successful solution to fighting absolutely every spam message was so simple we would already have been solved, no?
Secondly, the form letter offers a terse list of not only the pitfalls of this particular approach, but a checklist of other things to consider when responding with "well ok what if I change $something?".
Thirdly, it's a subtle nudge saying "lots of people have already thought about this stuff, why not have a looksee at other work in the area and learn from people that have gone before you", without calling them out and getting all nasty.
The poster is doubtful "an idiot" for posting something that is a serious attempt at solving spam. Sure the idea won't work, but if coming up with a successful solution to fighting absolutely every spam message was so simple we would already have been solved, no?
Secondly, the form letter offers a terse list of not only the pitfalls of this particular approach, but a checklist of other things to consider when responding with "well ok what if I change $something?".
Thirdly, it's a subtle nudge saying "lots of people have already thought about this stuff, why not have a looksee at other work in the area and learn from people that have gone before you", without calling them out and getting all nasty.
Finally, levity isn't a misfeature.
Good day, ( ) sir / ( ) ma'am.