Clearly this guy's moral compass points south.
Is that a good thing or a bad thing?
Is that a good thing or a bad thing?
"Your typical architecture astronaut will take a fact like "Napster is a peer-to-peer service for downloading music" and ignore everything but the architecture, thinking it's interesting because it's peer to peer, completely missing the point that it's interesting because you can type the name of a song and listen to it right away."
Yes there might be two points on your compass but the "interesting" point is the one that's drawn to the magnetic pole of the planet. Cushman, you're a rhetoric astronaut.
(Now I suspect the bit about the level of discourse does apply; I was well-aware of magnetic polarity in 1st grade, and polarity itself defines there being two ends...)
Nerds, each of us. I say that affectionately but man I regret answering theorique's question.
And the pedantic-bs-to-save-some-face-of-the-day award, goes to...
Because Cushman pointed out that a compass tends to have two points, he has received several downvotes. He's got, surprisingly, more than one person suggesting that he should be fired. Where does that even come from? Why is someone being a little pedantic on a web forum cause to tell them they shouldn't have a job?
Especially when he's right: compasses can point both directions. He didn't attack anyone and say they should be fired, he didn't accuse someone of being a "rhetoric astronaut". What's the value in being so hurtful? Most surprising of all is that so many people jumped in. Like they were just waiting to make fun of someone on the internet.
I'd love to see attacks at people stop happening here, because good discussions do still occur. But my remarks are just more reactionary bullshit, I guess. Maybe I should be fired too.
He is being downvoted because obviously none of this has any to do with an actual compass and is merely adding noise to the discussion.
It does seems like an interesting little pattern on HN, though. I've found I tend to get the most upvotes for expressing the strongest opinions, even "controversial" ones. Maybe it goes against the conventional wisdom, but usually, when I get downvoted, it's not because I've said something unpopular, but because I've said something mildly challenging, but otherwise completely blasé-- like pointing out that there's nothing privileged about the north pole of a dipole magnet. (It's the sort of thing liberal arts grads love to talk about, I'm not surprised it doesn't play well here.)
Normally, of course, there'll be a downvote or two and that's that. On the extreme end, you'll see this strange phenomenon where something is so insultingly boring that it necessitates a whole comment thread complaining about it. I actually find it really fascinating.
well, that's because his comment, though superficially relevant, was actually pure noise. there was no compass involved to have two points; the term was being used metaphorically, and everyone (cushman included) knew what it meant.