Please don't post personal attacks to HN, regardless of $Person.
A comment like this does not gratify curiosity, only indignation, and we're here for the former not the latter.
A comment like this does not gratify curiosity, only indignation, and we're here for the former not the latter.
It's not that you owe Zuckerberg or any other specific person better, but rather that you owe this community better if you're participating in it. (And by 'you' of course, I don't mean you personally, but all of us.)
This is where it crossed from critique to attack.
as for the newsguidelines, I think it "gratifies one's intellectual curiosity" to think about what motivates tech ceos and talk about how they do things
I doubt that a purely logical evaluation is possible of any statement at all, outside of formal languages, but let's not digress. (Or maybe we should! it's at least more interesting to talk about than how $Billionaire-CEO just got lucky, lacks talent, or is a charlatan.)
> I think it "gratifies one's intellectual curiosity" to think about what motivates tech ceos and talk about how they do things
Yes, that's possible, but if one is venting indignation then one is doing something different.
To digress again: "intellectual curiosity" is a funny phrase, one I don't entirely care for - it verges on pretentious and reminds me of Hemingway's ten-dollar words*. But I've stuck with it because you can't just say "curiosity", because there are other kinds of curiosity and they are quite different.
It was stated to be an opinion and opinions are inherently emotional, so that goes without saying, but it is a fact that the account holds that opinion and learning about that fact should spark intellectual curiosity. It is a property of the state of universe along with all the others. There is no reason to believe that intellectual curiosity is limited to only a subset of universe properties.
Perhaps what this reveals is that HN does not attract a curious audience (anymore)? Does that suggest the guidelines are not in tune with the wants and needs of the user base? Trying to force curiosity to emerge does not go far if the users aren't curious to begin with.
Maybe it should, but you don't need much experience with the internet to know that a comment like https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48648885 doesn't and won't. There's no need to look for deeper phenomena like mysterious shifts in the audience.
The properties of the state of the universe are effectively infinite. Not all users will find curiosity in the same properties. It is understandable that you may not find the same gratification here. There is still no reason to believe that intellectual curiosity must be limited to a subset of those properties, is there?