News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behin... by jsmthrowaway on Sunday March 16, 2014 @05:34AM (#7408790)
Considering the context, I think it is perfectly reasonable to lament the choice of wording and no, I will not be deleting my comment because you don't like it. It has a rather higher score than I anticipated, so I didn't react to that wording in a vacuum, now did I?

For someone who hates tangents you're sure good at them.

Re:Julie Ann Horvath Describes Sexism and Intimidation Behin... by Dylan16807 on Sunday March 16, 2014 @12:54PM (#7410129)
Sometimes people complain about comments getting downvoted out of disagreement, even though they contribute to the discussion. But I am far more bothered by the inverse problem: comments that get upvoted out of shallow agreement even though they serve no purpose, focusing on some negligibly relevant detail in a haughty way. These comments make it harder to participate in the conversation for fear of people latching on to completely irrelevant details and drowning out the message.

In short: Upvotes correlate with good comments, but they also correlate with certain types of poisonous comment.

As to continuing tangents, I would have been quite happy to see both of our comments dug into invisible gray together. But even if that fails I'm happy to provide a bright warning against being reactionary, and to hope that any wasted space is meta at worst.