Re:Cutting Edge Deep Learning for Coders, Part 2
by rashkov on Tuesday May 08, 2018 @10:40AM
(#17021194)
Since you appreciate candid feedback, I would like to explain why I down-voted you. Your post comes off as super rude and dismissive. You may have some valid criticism to give but, take more care in how you deliver it. It's a bad look for HN.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Cutting Edge Deep Learning for Coders, Part 2
by bitL on Tuesday May 08, 2018 @12:53PM
(#17022438)
I appreciate your feedback! :) It's difficult to convey mental state over a single line of text, giving rise to various interpretations that weren't in the intent. Imagine I am your best friend and I say the same in a playful fashion - would that be more acceptable?
Re:Cutting Edge Deep Learning for Coders, Part 2
by rashkov on Tuesday May 08, 2018 @04:48PM
(#17024906)
Absolutely! That's actually in the hacker news commenting guidelines: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
So to answer you question, yes, it would be more acceptable if you were saying that to me in person. In fact, I agree with you about the flow of the lectures, and I was looking for someone to bring that up and I'm glad that it's getting discussed here.
However, Jeremy and Rachel are both reading these comments and we should strive to provide thoughtful, fleshed out feedback. The work they've done on Fast.ai is a tremendous lift, and deserves more than a drive-by comment.