Maybe it's my frequently-flagged ass, but this comment doesn't seem to contribute less than most other language-oriented commentary. In fact, it seems more honest and wastes less of our time than most. There must be thousands of vapid opinions shared about programming languages on this site each week, most of which are actively distracting to fruitful conversation, and many of which engage in openly-counterproductive bike shedding over syntax, arguing over phrases like "low-level" vs "high-level", whether or not rust's borrow-checker is the key to nirvana or a major distraction holding back our best hackers, etc. It truly makes any discussion about programming languages difficult to stomach.
The above comment at least seems concise, pushes a narrative that actually makes sense (you should pick the right tool for the job, even if I personally think rust is better as I noted in a sibling comment 7 hours before you). The person is openly stating a feeling as a feeling rather than as some kind of nuanced position, which is better than most HN commenters can manage to admit. It certainly doesn't come off as flame bait or a generic tangent, certainly not even compared to most of the commentary in this or related threads.
Also, I don't know how to vouch for said comment. I really don't like the flagging system, and I really wish we could opt-out of respecting it from the view of our logged-in profile. Even the whole 'show dead' thing still preserves the semantics of flagging restricting interaction.
> "Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something."
If this standard were consistently enforced, this site would be a graveyard. At some point we must grapple with how this obviously not-enforced rule is leveraged in seemingly-arbitrary places.
---
In short: I have no clue why this particular comment is singled out when most engagement on programming language is a distinctly more flagrant violation of the rules. Even if I happen to disagree with it.
I suppose what made me respond to that comment is that it was so plainly a generic tangent, moving the discussion in a repetitive/indignant direction—exactly opposite to the direction we hope threads will go. Also, such comments are particularly bad when the thread is new, and particularly bad at the toplevel.
> If this standard were consistently enforced, this site would be a graveyard
That sort of thing is super easy to say, but is plainly untrue. Alas, it has a destructive effect in its own right. If you guys knew how fragile everything is that we're trying (and failing) to achieve here, I believe you would be more careful. It's a tragedy of the commons thing: it's feels better to point fingers and blame others for a deplorable shared situation, than to fix one's own contributions.
That is not to dispute that many embarrassingly low-quality comments get posted to Hacker News. It bothers me and I wish it were otherwise.
The above comment at least seems concise, pushes a narrative that actually makes sense (you should pick the right tool for the job, even if I personally think rust is better as I noted in a sibling comment 7 hours before you). The person is openly stating a feeling as a feeling rather than as some kind of nuanced position, which is better than most HN commenters can manage to admit. It certainly doesn't come off as flame bait or a generic tangent, certainly not even compared to most of the commentary in this or related threads.
Also, I don't know how to vouch for said comment. I really don't like the flagging system, and I really wish we could opt-out of respecting it from the view of our logged-in profile. Even the whole 'show dead' thing still preserves the semantics of flagging restricting interaction.
> "Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something."
If this standard were consistently enforced, this site would be a graveyard. At some point we must grapple with how this obviously not-enforced rule is leveraged in seemingly-arbitrary places.
---
In short: I have no clue why this particular comment is singled out when most engagement on programming language is a distinctly more flagrant violation of the rules. Even if I happen to disagree with it.