Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Someone Stole Sherlock's 300,000 Likes

spottedsun.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 57 posts

Re: Someone Stole Sherlock's 300,000 Likes

#31

Post by justindocanto »

egonschiele wrote: post #29
goodside wrote: post #5

The moral of the story here is that you shouldn't invest your time and emotional energy into things that actually belong to other people. You didn't own a website here. You didn't write code, you didn't set up servers, and you didn't sit around worrying about whether you were monetizing well enough to keep the site from imploding under its own popularity. You volunteered to be the curator of an entry in a database ow…

I feel the exact opposite. The trend in SV seems to be building communities around your product. This is an example of a product that did it very well...someone was so entrenched in the community that it became a huge part of their life. To take that away seems to go against the idea of community.

And what was his product? Somebody else's trademark? show? product?

Re: Someone Stole Sherlock's 300,000 Likes

#32

Post by MBlume »

ghshephard wrote: post #19
DannyPage wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same argument could be flipped on you! I believe you post a lot on Hacker News, but you don't own the code, servers, etc. You are a volunteer commenter. What if someone blocked and deleted all of your comments? Wouldn't you feel the slightest bit of loss?

I would feel freedom. At that moment, my involvement in HN would come to an end, and I would find another way to use the 2 hours or so a day I spend on it. Think about what I could do with 700 hours/year. Indeed, I would embrace that deletion.

Er, you can have that freedom now, if you want it.

Re: Someone Stole Sherlock's 300,000 Likes

#33

Post by ghshephard »

MBlume wrote: post #32
ghshephard wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would feel freedom. At that moment, my involvement in HN would come to an end, and I would find another way to use the 2 hours or so a day I spend on it. Think about what I could do with 700 hours/year. Indeed, I would embrace that deletion.

Er, you can have that freedom now, if you want it.

That's like telling an alcoholic they don't have to drink. There's a reason why I've _never_ even glanced at Reddit. And I also took the plunge and deleted my Facebook Account. I lost three months of my life to Tribal Wars. I keep my time on HN to a couple hours a day - and it is my principal news source (No Techcrunch/engadge/verge/gizmodo - unless they are linked) - but if a moderator came and said "Deleted, return never again!." - I would embrace it. Not saying that's true for anyone else. I am implying that someone who spent the better part of two years managing a sherlock fan site, only to have it go "poof!" - shouldn't feel bad whatsoever.

Re: Someone Stole Sherlock's 300,000 Likes

#34

Post by rhizome »

goodside wrote: post #5

The moral of the story here is that you shouldn't invest your time and emotional energy into things that actually belong to other people. You didn't own a website here. You didn't write code, you didn't set up servers, and you didn't sit around worrying about whether you were monetizing well enough to keep the site from imploding under its own popularity. You volunteered to be the curator of an entry in a database ow…

The funny thing is that this reminded me instantly of the Twitter API cutdowns. It's the extreme case where really, at the end of the day, the site decides what goes where, a business version of "the government has a monopoly on the use of force."

Re: Someone Stole Sherlock's 300,000 Likes

#36

Post by a3_nm »

jquery wrote: post #11
ryguytilidie wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually came to write that the big takeaway for me was to care about things that actually exist. Pouring your life into a fan site that can one day disappear seems incredibly depressing. In that time others have built companies, relationships and a happy life and you have built: a collection of fan art for an obscure tv show. Isn't there something better one could be doing?

A more Zenlike takeaway would be to realize that everything has an end and to accept that. There is nothing that can't be taken away from you.

Accepting that everything has an end and nothing can't be taken away from you is fine, but this doesn't mean you should not focus more on things that can't be taken away from you easily (i.e. until you die).

Re: Someone Stole Sherlock's 300,000 Likes

#38

Post by GoodIntentions »

jquery wrote: post #11
ryguytilidie wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually came to write that the big takeaway for me was to care about things that actually exist. Pouring your life into a fan site that can one day disappear seems incredibly depressing. In that time others have built companies, relationships and a happy life and you have built: a collection of fan art for an obscure tv show. Isn't there something better one could be doing?

A more Zenlike takeaway would be to realize that everything has an end and to accept that. There is nothing that can't be taken away from you.

I read that as "there is nothing that can be taken away from you"

Same frame of mind I think, slightly different way of expressing it. :P

Re: Someone Stole Sherlock's 300,000 Likes

#40

Post by GoodIntentions »

Having a hard time understanding why anyone would put unfettered effort into building up content on a platform where they have absolutely no right of access save at the pleasure of the platform owner.

Take that love of the show and build a fansite or better yet something where you don't have to worry about the copyright holder shutting you down.

Post reply on HN