Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

You seem to be implicitly claiming that one only earns a right to critique the usability of a given piece of software if one is also capable of debugging and enhancing that software. Do you really believe that?

Yes, you should be an expert of the field to critique it. Otherwise you are talking about thing that you don't know yourself.

A user having problems with a piece of software should NEVER have to be an expert in the field to critique it.

You don't need to be an expert in the culinary arts to determine the tastiness of a dish.

I don't like the taste of the food because I don't like the cook. Is that what are you defending? Secondly, you have to be an expert or at least knowledgeable to certain extent to talk about ingredients and style of cooking. Throwing 15 ingredients in a heated pan doesn't make you an excellent cook. Just because you can taste something delicious doesn't mean you will know everything about the that food.

This premise is flawed. There are certain ingredients that one just doesn't enjoy. If a dish is cooked with those ingredients, you won't like it regardless of the quality.

That's pretty much where my analogy falls apart, so I'm ditching it.

Whether I'm capable of contributing to a project that does not, in its current state, suit my needs has nothing to do with whether I'm in a position to contribute to that project.

This is especially true when there is an alternative that I'm already accustomed to using.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact