Re:Ask HN: Why is there so little info on the web about IBM ...
by x0n on Monday November 28, 2022 @11:35AM
(#33775730)
Thank you for setting that straight. Ther more I read through his answer, the more ludicrous it became.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Ask HN: Why is there so little info on the web about IBM ...
by pc86 on Monday November 28, 2022 @12:18PM
(#33776342)
There should be a way to flag and remove comments that don't violate any guidelines, but are just objectively wrong, in a way that doesn't penalize the author. Like "you tried, but nothing about this is correct, so it goes to the bottom of the comment section above all the dead/shadowbanned comments."
Re:Ask HN: Why is there so little info on the web about IBM ...
by ballenf on Monday November 28, 2022 @01:09PM
(#33777143)
I prefer the back-and-forth the way it is now. I perversely enjoy reading a comment and "buying into it" only to realize from a reply that I was naive or too trusting. Or, at least, that there are more angles to the story.
This helps you build up an immune system that is skeptical. If most wrong answers were removed/flagged/hidden then the remaining wrong but unflagged would be even more a problem.
Re:Ask HN: Why is there so little info on the web about IBM ...
by tejohnso on Monday November 28, 2022 @01:40PM
(#33777647)
Exactly. This helps train the "don't believe everything you read" muscle.
Re:Ask HN: Why is there so little info on the web about IBM ...
by edgyquant on Monday November 28, 2022 @02:51PM
(#33778624)
Sure for the percentage of people who do read all the way through and then rethink things. This is <1% in most communities
Re:Ask HN: Why is there so little info on the web about IBM ...
by setr on Monday November 28, 2022 @03:56PM
(#33779496)
Assuming everyone is an idiot, and designing around that basis, seems like a great way to foster a community of idiots.
And unlike stackoverflow, there’s not really any good reason for anyone to think a top-level comment is somehow authoritative, especially because the best comments on HN tend to be replies
Re:Ask HN: Why is there so little info on the web about IBM ...
by CRConrad on Wednesday November 30, 2022 @04:51AM
(#33798795)
> I perversely enjoy reading a comment and "buying into it" only to realize from a reply that I was naive or too trusting.
Good for debate and free speech in general, but bad for your grasp of the facts in the case every time there don't happen to be any corrective replies.
Hard to weighs pros vs cons.
(ObSillyPun: Naah, just put them on the scales! But remember that a lighter pro will often beat a heavier con anyway!)
Re:Ask HN: Why is there so little info on the web about IBM ...
by Melatonic on Monday November 28, 2022 @03:24PM
(#33779033)
Is reply and downvote not enough?
Re:Ask HN: Why is there so little info on the web about IBM ...
by pc86 on Tuesday November 29, 2022 @11:48AM
(#33789903)
I want to avoid the downvotes, though. Downvoting is for things that are off topic or don't add to the conversation, or comments made in bad faith. Someone who just happens to be wrong may very well be commenting earnestly in good faith.
Re:Ask HN: Why is there so little info on the web about IBM ...
by raarts on Tuesday November 29, 2022 @03:40AM
(#33785106)
Your bullshit detector should be trained continuously, not put to sleep by others labeling a post true or not. A dangerous path.
Re:Ask HN: Why is there so little info on the web about IBM ...
by 1500100900 on Monday November 28, 2022 @04:39PM
(#33780149)
So you DO search for answers to mainframe questions on s**overflow?