Did I break a rule? On Hacker News people post links to Wikipedia articles about concepts that a lot of people are not familiar with. And in fact, I've done this before on Tildes with no problems....
Did I break a rule? On Hacker News people post links to Wikipedia articles about concepts that a lot of people are not familiar with. And in fact, I've done this before on Tildes with no problems. Of course I could've “redditise” the title into “TIL a planck star is a hypothetical object…”, but that would've left a bad taste in my mouth.
I don't know. I would point out that @Deimos has removed your post since I brought it to his attention, so you'll need to ask him whether you broke a rule. However, in my personal opinion, I...
Did I break a rule?
I don't know. I would point out that @Deimos has removed your post since I brought it to his attention, so you'll need to ask him whether you broke a rule.
However, in my personal opinion, I believe this post goes against the spirit of Tildes, such as "Tildes prioritizes quality content and discussion". It's hard to get high-quality discussion from a bald link to Wikipedia.
You should know that your post spawned this later post, which was a bald link to the Wikipedia article about feces (before @Deimos removed it). Someone else saw your post and decided to mock it by making a literal shitpost. That's not your fault: their behaviour is their responsibility, not yours. But your post did set a precedent for that post: if your post linking to a Wikipedia article is acceptable, then their post linking to a Wikipedia article is equally acceptable - which is the point they were making (albeit clumsily).
On Hacker News...
But this isn't Hacker News.
Of course I could've “redditise” the title into “TIL a planck star is a hypothetical object…”, but that would've left a bad taste in my mouth.
I totally agree: this isn't Reddit, either. As a long-term redditor, I've had moments where I have stumbled across a new learning on the internet and had an impulse to make a TIL-style post here on Tildes... until I realised on second thought that's not what I want for Tildes.
Maybe you could have found another way to discuss Planck stars - if that's what you wanted to do - than just dumping a Wikipedia link with no context. Maybe, rather than starting "TIL...", you could have talked about a few interesting observations that particularly impressed you. Maybe you could have found a scientific paper about Planck stars to introduce your discussion. There are other ways to approach this than just "here's a Wikipedia article".
Why have you simply posted a link to a Wikipedia article?
Did I break a rule? On Hacker News people post links to Wikipedia articles about concepts that a lot of people are not familiar with. And in fact, I've done this before on Tildes with no problems. Of course I could've “redditise” the title into “TIL a planck star is a hypothetical object…”, but that would've left a bad taste in my mouth.
I don't know. I would point out that @Deimos has removed your post since I brought it to his attention, so you'll need to ask him whether you broke a rule.
However, in my personal opinion, I believe this post goes against the spirit of Tildes, such as "Tildes prioritizes quality content and discussion". It's hard to get high-quality discussion from a bald link to Wikipedia.
You should know that your post spawned this later post, which was a bald link to the Wikipedia article about feces (before @Deimos removed it). Someone else saw your post and decided to mock it by making a literal shitpost. That's not your fault: their behaviour is their responsibility, not yours. But your post did set a precedent for that post: if your post linking to a Wikipedia article is acceptable, then their post linking to a Wikipedia article is equally acceptable - which is the point they were making (albeit clumsily).
But this isn't Hacker News.
I totally agree: this isn't Reddit, either. As a long-term redditor, I've had moments where I have stumbled across a new learning on the internet and had an impulse to make a TIL-style post here on Tildes... until I realised on second thought that's not what I want for Tildes.
Maybe you could have found another way to discuss Planck stars - if that's what you wanted to do - than just dumping a Wikipedia link with no context. Maybe, rather than starting "TIL...", you could have talked about a few interesting observations that particularly impressed you. Maybe you could have found a scientific paper about Planck stars to introduce your discussion. There are other ways to approach this than just "here's a Wikipedia article".
Fair points. I am going to try to contribute better next time.
Happy to help!