I agree. The order I use: read the comments, read the article, and THEN post a comment if I have something to add.

Perhaps it should just prevent you from writing a comment before reading the article.

I like to read the article first, get a feel a of what it's about and then read comments to see further analysis. Reading article first let's me think about it before I get influenced (negative or positive) by reading the comments.

I agree, commenting without reading the article and only reading the comments is a sure-shot way of making a mistake.

As a point of note, there's research on this topic. Comments influence/bias how people feel/think about the content they read: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/a-blog-around-the-clock/...

You're not just getting landscape, you're getting the messy human battlefield of human opinion (sometimes for better, often for worse).

Personally i wish there were a plugin that would prevent voting until you've opened the link and spent at least a minute on page :P

I think more often for better, at least for this forum. I read commentary first more probabalistically based on the hype-sensationalism character of the title. I dont subscribe to the hivemind theory, in almost every thread there is well-argued commentary falling on both sides of the issues presented.

I don't want to reward linkbait and hype. A pdf link on the efficient implementation of the radon transform or compiler theory is much more likely to get an unfiltered click from me.

I notice a trend here in HN, the first comment will most of the times be opposite to the article (this thread is just another example).

To play the devil's advocate, if you read the comments before reading the article it's very easy to fall into the "hivemind" way of thinking without even noticing. If you read the article first you can formulate your own opinion individually and unbiasedly.

Jokes on you! I have no idea about what I'm talking about ;)