I agree. The main factor should be whether it's constructive criticism or not. In the case of the Wikipedia redesign thing, the tone of some of the comments might be a bit harsh but they were mostly insightful.
This is the internet, it's how it works, it's how it worked since at least Usenet (and probably before, but I can't testify of that). The social norm is different than regular "face to face" conversation.
It's harsher, but it's also often more honest I think.
This is the internet, it's how it works, it's how it worked since at least Usenet (and probably before, but I can't testify of that). The social norm is different than regular "face to face" conversation.
It's harsher, but it's also often more honest I think.
That's exactly what PG intended HN not to be. It's meant to be different, nicer, better thought out. If it devolves to a common web message board, we lose what makes it special. Read this, if you haven't before. Especially the last paragraph:
This is the internet, it's how it works, it's how it worked since at least Usenet (and probably before, but I can't testify of that). The social norm is different than regular "face to face" conversation.
It's harsher, but it's also often more honest I think.