<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>gwern</author><text>&amp;#62;  I&apos;m not picking on you specifically, but I think this is an example of a very common problem on HN. Someone posts a very harshly-worded negative comment. Then the OP responds to it, and the commenter walks back their comment and praises the post.&lt;p&gt;Or they&apos;re being honest the entire time, and simply posted about the negative part, because who wants to be that chucklehead going &apos;+1&apos; or &apos;Good post&apos; (&quot;that&apos;s what voting is for, dummy!&quot;)? Unfortunately, this then leads to comment sections coming off as negative and essentially being a bugtracker for a submission.&lt;p&gt;(Some relevant musings on this topic: &lt;a href=&quot;http://lesswrong.com/lw/3h/why_our_kind_cant_cooperate/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://lesswrong.com/lw/3h/why_our_kind_cant_cooperate/&lt;/a&gt; &amp;#38; &lt;a href=&quot;http://lesswrong.com/lw/372/defecting_by_accident_a_flaw_common_to_analytical/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://lesswrong.com/lw/372/defecting_by_accident_a_flaw_com...&lt;/a&gt; )</text><parent_chain><item><author>nkohari</author><text>I&apos;m not picking on you specifically, but I think this is an example of a very common problem on HN. Someone posts a very harshly-worded negative comment. Then the OP responds to it, and the commenter walks back their comment and praises the post.&lt;p&gt;It seems like once people realize they&apos;re communicating with other real-life human beings, they are much more civil. Couldn&apos;t we try to consider that ahead of time, and avoid the off-handed negativity in the first place? It would make HN (and nonverbal communication in general) much more productive and enjoyable.&lt;p&gt;If the two comments combined fully capture your viewpoint, why not say something along the lines of, &quot;Your advice is good and the post is fairly well-written, but it sort of comes off as a product advertisement. You cite scientific evidence, but you don&apos;t provide any sources, which makes it seem unsubstantiated.&quot;&lt;p&gt;Just a suggestion.</text></item><item><author>treeface</author><text>Sure thing. I don&apos;t mean to imply that you are intentionally misguiding. Your general advice (i.e. sleep enough and do it consistently) is good and the post was fairly well-written. Cheers, good sir.</text></item><item><author>maroun</author><text>Thanks for your feedback! I worked for Zeo a year ago, however they&apos;ve since shut down so I have no affiliation to them. I&apos;ll be sure to go in add the relevant sources.</text></item><item><author>treeface</author><text>This post seems like one big, long unsubstantiated bunch of app spam for &quot;zeo&quot;. I don&apos;t think scientists understand the &quot;fact retention&quot; mechanism as well as OP claims, for instance. It&apos;s fairly clear that sleep is important, but there&apos;s a lot of unsourced information here that&apos;s presented as fact.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Sleep: Everything You Need to Know</title><url>https://medium.com/the-healthy-life/b65f8e19ed18</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>wonnage</author><text>Seconded. I see this (and am guilty myself) often even in workplace emails, etc. where people are supposed to be respectful. It&apos;s not so much that you can&apos;t put someone on blast, but whether you can live with knowing you just called another thinking human being a scumbag/asshole/dumbass/whatever.</text><parent_chain><item><author>nkohari</author><text>I&apos;m not picking on you specifically, but I think this is an example of a very common problem on HN. Someone posts a very harshly-worded negative comment. Then the OP responds to it, and the commenter walks back their comment and praises the post.&lt;p&gt;It seems like once people realize they&apos;re communicating with other real-life human beings, they are much more civil. Couldn&apos;t we try to consider that ahead of time, and avoid the off-handed negativity in the first place? It would make HN (and nonverbal communication in general) much more productive and enjoyable.&lt;p&gt;If the two comments combined fully capture your viewpoint, why not say something along the lines of, &quot;Your advice is good and the post is fairly well-written, but it sort of comes off as a product advertisement. You cite scientific evidence, but you don&apos;t provide any sources, which makes it seem unsubstantiated.&quot;&lt;p&gt;Just a suggestion.</text></item><item><author>treeface</author><text>Sure thing. I don&apos;t mean to imply that you are intentionally misguiding. Your general advice (i.e. sleep enough and do it consistently) is good and the post was fairly well-written. Cheers, good sir.</text></item><item><author>maroun</author><text>Thanks for your feedback! I worked for Zeo a year ago, however they&apos;ve since shut down so I have no affiliation to them. I&apos;ll be sure to go in add the relevant sources.</text></item><item><author>treeface</author><text>This post seems like one big, long unsubstantiated bunch of app spam for &quot;zeo&quot;. I don&apos;t think scientists understand the &quot;fact retention&quot; mechanism as well as OP claims, for instance. It&apos;s fairly clear that sleep is important, but there&apos;s a lot of unsourced information here that&apos;s presented as fact.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Sleep: Everything You Need to Know</title><url>https://medium.com/the-healthy-life/b65f8e19ed18</url></story>