
Freakonomics: What Went Wrong? - llambda
http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/id.14344,y.0,no.,content.true,page.1,css.print/issue.aspx
======
tokenadult
Previous submissions:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3349461>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3355254>

AFTER EDIT: Oh, and the previous submission with the most comments:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3350529>

As a few other HN participants before me have done, I note previous
submissions (when I notice them myself) partly to figure out the vagaries of
the duplicate thread detector here and partly to keep the emphasis here at
Hacker News on new stories. Some old stories are very worthy indeed of further
discussion, but looking at previous threads and their level of discussion can
help busy HN participants who didn't notice the last thread(s) decide how much
new discussion to engage in about a previously submitted story.

~~~
llambda
That would be useful if either of those had comments, but it doesn't look like
much of a discussion occurred on either. So I think this merits a repost and I
can't say I understand the purpose of commenting to simply link to no
discussion. Maybe you could enlighten us as to why you do that?

Edit: I see four comments in the link you added in edit. Unfortunately I find
these kinds of comments to be a distraction; they don't actually add value to
the discussion and instead contribute one more thing that must be filtered and
often ignored. In the cases where there is significant discussion, it can be
useful. But all too often it comes across as condescending and does little to
actually build upon a new discussion.

