Comment by lapcat | Hacker News Reader

Comment by lapcat | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> That's the point though. It collects a bunch of external sources in one spot that are all related to the same issue -- and provides the context.

You're missing the point, which is that this submission is just the latest in a long string of duplicate submissions, some of which have already been marked [dupe] by the moderators.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36142285

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36142418

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36143308

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36144763

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36147252

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36147411

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36150373

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36151713

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36152476

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36159487

> And the initial HN submission you linked to, "Had a call with Reddit to discuss pricing" -- does that in any way allude to its content?

It's literally the link quoted by "The creator of Apollo has done the math, and says"

> It's literally the link quoted by "The creator of Apollo has done the math, and says"

So? The headline of the submission lacks meaning and provides no information. You would have to click into the link to realize wha the discussion is about.

> You're missing the point, which is that this submission is just the latest in a long string of duplicate submissions, some of which have already been marked [dupe] by the moderators.

My point is that this article sets up a different (and valid) discussion, provides wider context, and has a submission headline that gives human-readable context to the topic. (And the HN title has since been updated to use the article secondary heading to be even clearer).

The link you posted had a big discussion yesterday, but it has already been bumped way down from the front page. Other discussions on subsequent days (especially if new information comes out -- or when other developers affected by the change speak up) are useful and should also be encouraged.

> The headline of the submission lacks meaning and provides no information. You would have to click into the link to realize wha the discussion is about.

Nonetheless: "Please submit the original source. If a post reports on something found on another site, submit the latter." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

> My point is that this article sets up a different (and valid) discussion

Different? No. The discussion is the basically same as before.

> provides wider context

Some of the other HN submissions I linked above also provide wider context. This is a dupe.

> Other discussions on subsequent days (especially if new information comes out -- or when other developers affected by the change speak up) are useful and should also be encouraged.

No, that's actually contrary to HN policy:

"Are reposts ok? If a story has not had significant attention in the last year or so, a small number of reposts is ok. Otherwise we bury reposts as duplicates." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html

Moreover, the other developer's link in the Kotaku article was also already submitted to HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36151713 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36147411

> Nonetheless: "Please submit the original source.

What's the 'original' source? One developer's specific problem with the Reddit API policy change?

> The discussion is the basically same as before.

Disagree. For one, it's active and on the main page. And, easier to jump in.

> No, that's actually contrary to HN policy:

That's for reposts. Our thread here is arguing whether or not it's a repost/dupe. I believe it is not.

> the other developer's link in the Kotaku article was also already submitted to HN

Ok? And with no discussion? But, again, this post puts it together, provides links to those sources, and tries to add some context.

You're saying this submission should not exist: "Please submitters, check before you submit." but I disagree and think it's valuable for providing more information, links to related content, and a place for new discussion.

Why does this post remain on the front page if it is so clearly a 'dupe'? Why has the headline been updated by HN?

Heck, you've even made me think that second-day update posts should be encouraged on HN. First-day posts tend to lack a lot of critical information and a lot of knee-jerk/hot take reactions. As of now, has anyone from Reddit come out to refute or clarify the claims of the third party devs?

Postmortem: The HN moderators marked this one as a [dupe] too.

>You're missing the point, which is that this submission is just the latest in a long string of duplicate submissions, some of which have already been marked [dupe] by the moderators.

Then let the moderators moderate, and you can choose a different hill upon which to die, so to speak.

> Then let the moderators moderate

They did: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36167892

> you can choose a different hill upon which to die, so to speak.

I didn't die on the hill, I conquered it. ;-)

>I didn't die on the hill, I conquered it. ;-)

Not really. They did. But I hope playing pretend moderator was fulfilling for you.

I pointed out a dupe, which is an ordinary, everyday thing done on HN. Nothing unusual there.

For some strange reason, interestica (and now you) chose to argue with me about it, futilely, as it turns out. I wasn't the one dying on a hill.

My understanding is that the moderators often see comments pointing out a dupe, or pointing out that an article title is missing a (YEAR), and such comments are helpful. Indeed, I've seen them thank some such comments. Moreover, it's also a signal to other readers of the submission.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com