11–20 of 101 posts
Can we also skip the submissions asking people not to post things instead of just letting the community decide the same way it's been done for years?
Good one!
I don't mind them, I just wish they were tagged as such in the headline.
Can we also skip the submissions asking people not to post things instead of just letting the community decide the same way it's been done for years?
In this particular case the poster is being very reasonable: no lame submissions. "Joel on Coal" is a good example. That might have been funny as h*ll back when Joel was blogging. Now that he's no longer blogging, it doesn't work nearly as well as a satire. But it is funny, and perhaps worth an upvote nearly any other day of the year.
But on this day? No. It isn't actually going to "fool" anyone. April first isn't a generalized satire day, it's about pranks. And "Joel on Coal" isn't a prank, nobody is going to read that and wonder if Joel Spolsky is writing about Coal.
p.s. If you pranked me by pretending that HN has a good track record for dealing with OT submissions, I say "well-played" and redouble my argument in favour of moderating April 1st submissions: Your comment is funnier than most of the so-called prank posts I've seen.
Yes, yes, a thousand times yes. Please, please, quit submitting this inane crap to HN!!! If you must share this stuff, there's always /. and Reddit for your convenience.
Personally I like the Apple Fool's submissions. I've even been tricked by a few. It's all in good fun and puts some heart in the cold machine that is technology news.
+1 for articulating an excellent standard for April Fool's submissions: If you are tricked by a post, it's worth submitting and seeing what other people think.
But honestly, anyone looking at a post and seeing right through it, don't bother submitting it to HN. If it doesn't fool you, it isn't that interesting.
Is that so wrong?