Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean no offense, and I realize that this is your site; but I really think jug6ernaut's comment added far more value than your response. I don't think jug6ernaut missed the point whatsoever, and I wouldn't characterize him as nit-picking either: The question of who is expected to understand the t-shirt and what its point is (as compared to an unbranded t-shirt) are perfectly reasonable. Personally I see nothing wron…
I feel like I'm trapped in an HN parody. It's precisely because I want HN to be a site where people engage in meaningful discussion that I try to discourage people from upvoting the first dismissive comment they come across. Even discourage is probably too strong a word though. I feel like someone standing in the surf, trying to hold back a breaking wave with his hand. (I didn't answer his question because other user…
I guess that's where we disagree then: I didn't see that comment as being dismissive, but rather as raising a legitimate question.
I serve as an alumni representative on a number of committees at my alma mater, and it's very rare that a proposal comes to us and does not meet with any criticism. This isn't because we have lots of horrible proposals coming to us or because we're grouchy old academics; it's because even if we like the general idea behind something, the precise details are rarely perfect. It's very rare for us to actually vote against something, and even proposals being withdrawn are rare; but there are a great many ideas which are changed -- and hopefully improved -- as a result of the criticisms they receive.
If jug6ernaut had written "a Hacker News t-shirt? What a dumb idea... I get lots of free t-shirts and if I donate $13 directly then Watsi ends up with far more money" then I would have said that he was being dismissive and the comment was not useful. But he didn't; instead, he asked a question about the detail -- is this the best design for a HN t-shirt? Is it too minimalist? -- and implicitly suggested a potential improvement.
It's natural, having spent time working on something, to view any criticism as an attack to be defended against; but the more we can deny that impulse and give people the benefit of the doubt when it comes to their motives in raising questions, the more useful I think our discussions can be.