zlacker

[parent] [thread] 4 comments
1. rvz+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-11-05 19:20:39
Thanks for what exactly?
replies(1): >>Tadpol+N4
2. Tadpol+N4[view] [source] 2023-11-05 19:48:09
>>rvz+(OP)
It seems strange to interrogate why someone thanked someone else, doesn't it? Are you trying to start a fight with them over a simple acknowledgement that they agree?
replies(1): >>nickth+af
◧◩
3. nickth+af[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-05 20:54:31
>>Tadpol+N4
If every HN was full of thank you posts, it would be unreadable. Upvotes exist. I prefer comments to add to the discussion, so I don’t find the users request for more information to be that baffling. Their comment was at least trying to further their understanding, which is more than sillysaurx did.
replies(2): >>Tadpol+Qy >>sillys+yB
◧◩◪
4. Tadpol+Qy[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-05 23:16:27
>>nickth+af
Then vote and/or report? They aren't trying to further their understanding, that much is clear when their dialogue started by saying anyone who holds a different ideological position is a grifter. They're trying to start a fight with a bystander who supported the "other".
◧◩◪
5. sillys+yB[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-05 23:36:23
>>nickth+af
I’ve been on HN since the beginning. pg himself said that thank yous are fine. Empty but positive comments are not harmful.

I’ll leave my gratitude a mystery. They have my thanks, and my axe.

[go to top]