Re:Tunable eyeglass lenses to replace bifocals
by Groxx on Sunday February 05, 2017 @12:13PM
(#13573306)
The other half of that though: should this site allow links that require payment to view?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Tunable eyeglass lenses to replace bifocals
by maxerickson on Sunday February 05, 2017 @01:19PM
(#13573634)
Yes.
It's super easy to ignore an article/discussion, even without the "hide" button that completely disappears it from the front page.
Re:Tunable eyeglass lenses to replace bifocals
by derekp7 on Sunday February 05, 2017 @02:36PM
(#13574098)
Problem is, the topic itself may be worthy of discussion -- but then you limit the people involved in the discussion (who have read the article) only to those who have a subscription to that given site.
What would be more useful is, where possible, post a non-paywall link, to maximize the number of potential participants in the discussion. An alternative in cases where the paywall link is the primary source, is to post a summary in a comment. But then you risk having the editorial slant of the summary be tilted towards whoever wrote up the summary.
Re:Tunable eyeglass lenses to replace bifocals
by maxerickson on Sunday February 05, 2017 @03:22PM
(#13574387)
I think it's maybe a little optimistic to assume that only people that read an article will brave a comment.
And even so, is it that big a problem if subscribers to some publication are the ones that can make an interesting comment about an article? Where's the downside to hosting that discussion?
Re:Tunable eyeglass lenses to replace bifocals
by Dylan16807 on Sunday February 05, 2017 @04:41PM
(#13574804)
An article has to be pretty special in quality for that level of exclusion to be worth using it instead of a similar article elsewhere.