It is a technical point, in a technical forum. It is fairly common for HNers to comment, say, on the CSS technology used in an article about the US deficit, and they are generally not downvoted or scolded. Similarly, my comment is that the author essentially appeals to no CSS at all.
You really don't get this? People comment on the css when it interesting and you can learn from it. Saying someone didn't use css is not interesting at all.
It's not a design page, it's not an html tutorial, it's an article on DNS, the html and css make difference at all.
Try to answer (in your mind) the question: "So what?" to both your posts. Merely raising a point isn't really enough - there has to be a reason to raise it.
Since this is no longer about my comment, but rather about me, let me open my response by saying that what I really don't get is what drove you to consider my uniniteresting comment worthy of your time and words, instead of simply downvoting it, just as many people did (some upvoted, though!).
Merely raising a point isn't really enough - there has to be a reason to raise it.
My point, in case it was not clear, is that there is merit and elegance to not using CSS at all. It is (arguably!) the purest way of exalting content: forgetting completely about presentational aspects. My point, maybe not well explained first, is that it is noteworthy to see this kind of choice in 2011 by a tech-savvy author. It may not be interesting to you, but it is for more than one person. See, e.g., [1], [2].
I accept this may not be interesting to you, and even to most HNers. Rest assured that if (and only if) I find an overwhelming proof of the latter, I will avoid this kind of comment in the future. But, for the love of Ken, don't even try to take ownership of as subjective a concept as "interesting". Heck, an article on anything at all on HN brings up well-received comments on ping times, DNS servers, JS file delivery, etc. and, um, that may have nothing to do with the content of the article itself. That's one of the main reasons I, for one, love HN.
I did not downvote your comment, and I replied because I felt bad for you. You didn't seem (and still don't) to get what was wrong with your comment.
Your comments about css etc are perfectly fine, and interesting, in an of themself - but not in the context of that article. In the context of that article they were off topic.
Your reply indicates that you think that if the topic is interesting at all (your footnotes) then it can be placed anywhere, and that is not so. Comments need to stay on topic to the article they are attached to. It would be one thing if the topic were css and you were brining up a side note. But this article was about dns, css was not on anyone else's mind.
I appreciate your clarification. For what is worth, I personally don’t use downvoting at all (except by accident!): I simply don’t upvote.
Now, please bear in mind that while you just replied
Your comments about css etc are perfectly fine, and interesting, in an of themself - but not in the context of that article. In the context of that article they were off topic.
you previously stated
People comment on the css when it interesting and you can learn from it. Saying someone didn't use css is not interesting at all.
I was obviously replying to the latter.
Let me emphasize a point you’re not addressing. Even though vote counts are gone, relative positioning of comments give you an idea of what HN as a community deems interesting. Clearly my original comment was not considered enlightening, engaging, nor for that matter inappropriate. But, again, plenty of popular comments are decidedly off topic with respect to the article’s content: DNS, webserver used, whois information, ping times, JS usage, accessibility, color choice, cookies, character encoding, HTML semantics, etc.
But that’s the thing: the moment you provide a URL in HN, many aspects that go way beyond the actual content are generally not considered off topic. Whether that is right or wrong, whether this means “not getting it” are, in my opinion, entirely pointless mental exercises. Clearly, as soon as this changes significantly I will heed the cue and adjust, possibly looking for venues where this “off-topic” chatter is deemed acceptable and even fun.
In any event, thanks again for clarifying your point. Cheers.
