The Rap Test Commemorates 2pac's 43rd Birthday With Cool Map of His Discography
1–8 of 8 posts
Re: The Rap Test Commemorates 2pac's 43rd Birthday With Cool Map of His Discography
#2Re: The Rap Test Commemorates 2pac's 43rd Birthday With Cool Map of His Discography
#3Re: The Rap Test Commemorates 2pac's 43rd Birthday With Cool Map of His Discography
#4The Rap Test was discussed a few days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7883900
Re: The Rap Test Commemorates 2pac's 43rd Birthday With Cool Map of His Discography
#5Re: The Rap Test Commemorates 2pac's 43rd Birthday With Cool Map of His Discography
#6The Rap Test was discussed a few days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7883900
Yes; we've buried this as a dupe.
These guys built an awesome new discography map and timed the Tupac launch perfectly. They created a novel way to celebrate the immortality one man's life work and discography, and HN has nothing but love for what some rap fans built.
RIP Pac. 2PAC BACK!
Re: The Rap Test Commemorates 2pac's 43rd Birthday With Cool Map of His Discography
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes; we've buried this as a dupe.
Isn't this map different than the original discussion though?
Once a product or site has had major attention here, follow-up posts have to stand on their own—i.e. be of substance and interest distinct from the original post. Otherwise we treat it as a dupe of the original. So, what's the delta here? A commemorative Tupac post and discography is probably not on-topic for HN.
An analogy might be a sports data website. An initial post is on-topic if the product is interesting. But a follow-up post analyzing a particular game probably wouldn't be, unless there were something particularly substantive (in the HN sense) about that game.
That's roughly the thought process. We're happy to change specific decisions if we get them wrong.
Re: The Rap Test Commemorates 2pac's 43rd Birthday With Cool Map of His Discography
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes; we've buried this as a dupe.
Isn't this map different than the original discussion though?