Bad faith argument that could only be made by not reading further into the article or cutting the quote off before it answers the exact question/argument posed here.
http://bradconte.com/files/misc/HackerNewsParodyThread/
Discussion (589 points, 189 comments):
A reminder that saying Hacker News is turning into Reddit is explicitly against the rules here, delivered in an unnecessarily condescending manner.
It is especially effective because he is doing all the things he is describing at a high level.
[0] https://medium.com/@hondanhon/this-is-a-think-piece-78618692...
Fill the rest of the article assuming this is the readers first day on planet earth. Like, an article about a CPU architecture should start with the early history of mathematics.
> Please don't complain about tangential annoyances—e.g. article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button breakage. They're too common to be interesting.
A second paragraph vaguely taking aim at every common framework and library used and why they're all the real fundamental problem.
>Fletcher Munson: [sunnily, on homecoming] Generic greeting!
>Mrs. Munson: [warmly] Generic greeting returned!
>[they kiss and chuckle at each other]
>Fletcher Munson: Imminent sustenance.
>Mrs. Munson: Overly dramatic statement regarding upcoming meal.
>Fletcher Munson: Oooh! False reaction indicating hunger and excitement!
> On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups.
The article itself was in fact delightful once I zoomed out a bunch.
----
Title of the song
Naive expression of love
Reluctance to accept that you are gone
Request to turn back time and rectify my wrongs
Repetition of the title of the song
> a quote from the article
A link to something relevant or interesting to add or support a point [1]
An opinionated comment or personal anecdote.
[1] the link from above
> An opinionated comment or personal anecdote.
Counter opinion or added nuance. [1]
[1] A link for support or to demonstrate a counterexample.
Group 1: A thinly veiled straw man that buckets everyone I disagree with, along with an attempt to appear as if I'm being unbiased
Group 2: The group I put myself in and provide better arguments for why this perspective is correct.
Vague motte and bailey statement that gives me plausible deniability when someone criticizes my analysis.
A niche reference almost no one gets, except one
Have you seen cases where timing mattered more than the message itself?
Fox News used to be awful in this respect, with ledes such as "(Important thing) happens in (unnamed city)". Now they name the city. So that trick apparently backfired. It seems to have died out, along with "One weird trick..." articles.
New York Times opinion articles, though, have become worse. Today, "This May Be the Most Important Medical Story of the Decade". It's not.