| One of the joys of the web is being able to easily cite and read sources (it was the whole point of hypertext). Sure, we could all just discuss and debate by shooting from the hip with our opinions and recollections like we are at a wine-fueled dinner party but that's not why I come to Hacker News. I wasn't trying to win or even have an argument with you. I was just trying to better my own understanding of the situation. I hadn't seen Alexis write that and couldn't find it despite spending way more time than I should be reading about reddit drama. I don't know who you are or why I should take your word for it. I don't know why you'd expect me to take your word for it. That's something you do for people you know in person and trust, not strangers on the internet. That'd be a terrifying prospect if that's how we all did things online. I, too, have noticed a pattern: 1. Person A writes something about a topic. 2. Person B writes about how bad something is which is related but orthogonal to the actual topic. 3. Persons C...Y have a heated debate of the orthogonal topic. 4. Person Z writes thoughtful comments about the topic but nobody reads it because the meta debate has drown out the actual topic. A good name for it might be The Hacker News Comments Pattern. I'm not saying that's what you were doing. |
(I seriously wasn't saying you were trying to bait me into giving you more ammunition for a stupid argument, but I'm pretty sure you really are implying that I introduced a bogus topic.)