Comment by RaduTyrsina | Hacker News Reader

Comment by RaduTyrsina | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Thanks for the time you took to correct me

Indeed, the were some errors inside the piece that I almost never make

My mistake was to write and then submit it here, NOT KNOWING NOR EXPECTING that it would get so quickly picked up on the front page.

Quicker than I realized, I was confronted with the mistake I made, without having time to re-examine the article again.

And yes, I did research. Initially, I wanted to write something about Microsoft's focus on the cloud and then I found this piece - http://rcpmag.com/blogs/scott-bekker/2013/07/wpc-microsoft-1..., which is 3 days old, so, most likely, that is the initial source, but not Zdnet.

Then, I linked Microsoft's focus on cloud with the expansion in Iowa + another article with a funny, side fact - http://www.greenm3.com/gdcblog/2013/7/11/microsofts-new-orga...

then, I found this one - http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2013/07/10/micro...

Therefore, I stand for my work and I accept the errors that I made but please don't label my effort that quickly

> "My mistake was to write and then submit it here, NOT KNOWING NOR EXPECTING that it would get so quickly picked up on the front page.

> "Quicker than I realized, I was confronted with the mistake I made, without having time to re-examine the article again."

I hate to say this, but the title drew a lot of attention because of it being inaccurate. eg I clicked the link because my thought was "wow - that can't be true. I wonder where all these data centres are and how big they are". I'd guess many others did the same - which is why someone accused the article as linkbait.

I think this is one of those occasions that need to be chalked down as "experience". And a good reminder to all of us to proof read the stuff we post online. :)

Definitely,

I was so damn surprised, man!

The last story I had on the front page was like 6 months ago so I said to become active again and thought timing was crucial with this one.

I got the timing right :D

What I want to ask is this, with the current title, would it have been as "baiting"? I mean, did it have a chance of getting on the front page with the actual title? Because if it did, then it's too bad :(

The original / incorrect title was definitely more interesting than the new / correct version. It's no surprise to me that Microsoft have a number of data centres and a million servers seems believable. But the original title was so far fetched that I was fascinated to read how the numbers were comprised.

But going back to your original question, I wouldn't like to say if you'd have made the front page or not. It would have been less likely - but there's still a possibility enough people might have been interested to up-vote it. If I'm honest, I wouldn't have - but then I didn't up-vote your incorrect title either as I read then vote; and once I spotted the issues, I was put off voting - sorry :(

I've never really understood what drives articles to the front page though. I've read some cracking news items that failed to gain more than a couple of votes but equally I've read some extremely dull articles (and even Twitter statuses) that have made it. I guess it just shows how individual we all are.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com