What part of this comment seemed like a useful contribution to HN? If you knew anything about The Awl and didn't like it, that criticism would be useful: you'd be telling us things about it that we potentially didn't know or hadn't thought about. If you didn't know about The Awl, went and looked at it, and had something interesting to say about what you learned: that too would be interesting. But to know nothing about it, look at a couple headlines, and report back your discontent? What was the point in that? To provide a nucleation side for more lowbrow dismissal?

The Awl has been one of the most pioneering small publications for nearly a decade: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Awl

I mean, I guess you can judge all that work based on a cursory scan of one of their last stories if you want to. It just wouldn't be particularly fair.

Like anything, The Awl wasn't for everyone, but I know they published some of the funniest, most touching pieces I've read. This article does a pretty good job of summarizing it's impact on the media industry. https://www.theverge.com/2015/7/9/8908279/the-awl-profile-ch...

Me too, but I had a good chuckle at reading this piece in... "For nearly a decade we followed a dream of building a better Internet, and though we did not manage to do that every day we tried very hard and..."

the way the sentence broke for me was "... and though we did not manage to do that every day" "we tried very hard" rather than what I think was intended as "... and though we did not manage to do that" "every day we tried very hard". My first reading made me say "well if you didn't do that every day then of course".

i have ever heard of alexb138. opening their comment, the main thing i see is that they're an idiot/asshole. i can't say I'm sad to see them go

We've banned this account for repeatedly breaking the site guidelines.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html