Re:Fake Books
by thom on Monday October 24, 2022 @07:02AM
(#33315108)
"If you find that interesting, you might find this interesting" seems like a perfectly reasonable motivation for an HN comment. I think it's worth forgiving that and enjoying the broader horizons rather than treating HN threads as a way for lots of smart people to try and craft the most definitive statement about one narrow issue, while policing any deviation therefrom.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
> "If you find that interesting, you might find this interesting" seems like a perfectly reasonable motivation for an HN comment.
But that's not the form of the comment. It begins with "I think there’s a good chance it was ghost written by a content farm"!
If I were a content farm I'd probably use text cut and pasted from text models, but I'd never heard of the Mikkelson Twins and it was interesting to learn about them.
yes, so? can't we parse beyond the opening statement of the comment, and see the rest of its content?
can't a comment not reiterate in its opening statement what the author already said (to e.g. show the commentor's aggrement)?
this is too formulaic and pedantic a response