undefined | Better HN

0 pointsaw16211072y ago0 comments

That's a nice sentiment, but I'm not sure it's always a practical one to take simply because no one has the expertise/time/knowledge to evaluate all of the comments they read for accuracy/completeness/etc, especially if commenters are disagreeing on a subject you are not an expert in.

For example, if a comment claims an article is wrong about the development and use of the Nagle algorithm, I am very much not well-equipped to evaluate the comment on its own since that is not an area I know much about. If I see that comment was written by Animats, though, I can be reasonably confident I should trust the comment over the article, since he invented the algorithm.

0 comments

mgaunard2y ago

The correct approach is to assume that people bear no ill will -- I believe that is even part of the posting guidelines.

If someone makes the statement that something in an article is incorrect, and fails to takes into account some minutiae, it is probably because the person is knowledgeable about the topic and believes it to be the case.

There is no need to research who the author is, or to mod the person down because he appears to be a contrarian that doesn't follow the hivemind. If anything, that's just an interesting subject to look into.

aw1621107OP2y ago

> The correct approach is to assume that people bear no ill will -- I believe that is even part of the posting guidelines.

It is, but intent is distinct from correctness. I can believe that everyone is commenting in good faith and stating their honest beliefs, but that is little help when commenters take contrary positions and I would like to determine who is correct despite not being knowledgeable myself.

Under those circumstances, authorship is a useful signal. It doesn't need to be the sole determining factor, of course, but it's better than nothing.

mgaunard2y ago

I don't personally believe in using people's fame as a proxy for assessing correctness.

I think it best to make your own opinion based on the arguments presented to you. Sure, someone may convincingly say wrong things, and you might end up believing them, but then it's up to you to develop your own ability to see through bullshit (of which there is a lot in the tech space, especially when you get close to VCs).

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsaw16211072y ago0 comments

0 comments

mgaunard2y ago

The correct approach is to assume that people bear no ill will -- I believe that is even part of the posting guidelines.

aw1621107OP2y ago

> The correct approach is to assume that people bear no ill will -- I believe that is even part of the posting guidelines.

Under those circumstances, authorship is a useful signal. It doesn't need to be the sole determining factor, of course, but it's better than nothing.

mgaunard2y ago

I don't personally believe in using people's fame as a proxy for assessing correctness.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse