What 4chan thinks of HN
171–180 of 265 posts
Re: What 4chan thinks of HN
#172Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if there is a relevant xkcd about this very issue.
This one covers it pretty well: http://dynamic.xkcd.com/random/comic/
Re: What 4chan thinks of HN
#173I'm actually really surprised they seem to think that the HN community is anti-sexist. Compared to 4chan, maybe, but from my experience it isn't at all.
Even better, a decent number of those who are willing to speak out are also capable of doing it reasonably and coherently with an eye towards explaining the issues understandably. That doesn't mean the people they're talking with are convinced; people are almost never convinced like that.
And best of all, we aren't downvoted into oblivion when we take such stands. I've gotten some significant chunks of karma for being the feminist in a thread. If all of this labels us "anti-sexist", I'm cool with it.
Re: What 4chan thinks of HN
#174I find the community here gives the most comprehensive and unbiased answer, while still being passionate about their opinions.
Re: What 4chan thinks of HN
#175How could they have left out the patronizing irrelevant [0] links [1] to Wikipedia [2] in all the wannabe-academic [3] comments with references[4]? (and yes, references must be 0-based [5]) [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relevance [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_resource_locator [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academia [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citation [5…
References would be unnecessary if HN comments supported such complex and over-the-top formatting as links (or escapable asterisks, for that matter, but then again who ever heard about using asterisks in a programming context?), which definitely haven't been a feature of all forum softwares since time immemorial.
It does not, and posting links inline often makes for unreadable garbage, hence pseudo-references, exactly as in mailing lists.
Re: What 4chan thinks of HN
#176Re: What 4chan thinks of HN
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Shame about the captcha. you were never on 4chan before captchas, were you?
I was. At least before that bot hit that copied a random file from someone's document folder and uploaded it along with another copy of the bot to 4chan. That was hilarious. I still have an archive of those files somewhere.
You'll also be supporting the site.
Re: What 4chan thinks of HN
#178Sadly, most of the things on there are true. We can try to deny it all we want, but most of the stuff that's there is true. The power of anonymity is that you get to voice honest opinions without tying it up with your identity and/or feeling responsible for it. Of course, this can be argued otherwise too, by citing some (bad) comments as example from that thread, but for the most part, what you see there are honest c…
Re: What 4chan thinks of HN
#179Sadly, most of the things on there are true. We can try to deny it all we want, but most of the stuff that's there is true. The power of anonymity is that you get to voice honest opinions without tying it up with your identity and/or feeling responsible for it. Of course, this can be argued otherwise too, by citing some (bad) comments as example from that thread, but for the most part, what you see there are honest c…
My favorite was >Disrupt Disruption