<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>tomatsu</author><text>I always thought it was odd when they go with the whole &amp;quot;&lt;a href=&quot;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.&amp;quot;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.&amp;quot;&lt;/a&gt; voodoo ritual, but then they skip the final slash after the domain.</text><parent_chain><item><author>karlshea</author><text>At least we&amp;#x27;ve mostly gotten away from &amp;quot;h-t-t-p-colon-slash-slash...&amp;quot;</text></item><item><author>edmccard</author><text>&amp;gt;having seen a lot of non-savvy users use Internet, I am firmly with WWW&lt;p&gt;As an anecdotal counterpoint, at our family Christmas, I mentioned a few different urls, spelling out &amp;quot;www&amp;quot; each time; one of my nieces said &amp;quot;why do you keep saying &amp;#x27;www&amp;#x27;&amp;quot;, and one of the other kids said &amp;quot;that&amp;#x27;s how old people find websites.&amp;quot; After some discussion, it turned out that nearly everyone over 30 habitually wrote urls with &amp;quot;www&amp;quot; at the front, and everyone under 18 always omitted it.</text></item><item><author>arihant</author><text>I understand the article walks through the technical aspects. However, having seen a lot of non-savvy users use Internet, I am firmly with WWW. Probably because of association and all major &amp;quot;established&amp;quot; companies using www, people associate it with strength. I have learned it to be important in similar ways that a .com extension is.&lt;p&gt;If the site did not have www, most people assumed it is probably made by kids, who do not have www yet. See, most people do not understand that www is not a domain like .com which you have to buy. So for average joe consumer, it signals strength. For an enterprise customer, it probably does too. So unless your product is for savvy users or zen-like designers, I&amp;#x27;d stick with www.&lt;p&gt;A lot of people think that naked domain is cleaner. It is actually not, since the average mind is conditioned to read www.x.com, and you have &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;x.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;x.com&lt;/a&gt;. It&amp;#x27;s cleaner in the sense that a face is cleaner without a nose.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>To www or not www</title><url>https://www.netlify.com/blog/2017/02/28/to-www-or-not-www/?utm_content=buffer67bee&amp;utm_medium=social&amp;utm_source=twitter.com&amp;utm_campaign=buffer</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>edmccard</author><text>Or even worse, &amp;quot;h-t-t-p-colon-backslash-backslash...&amp;quot; from people who were used to saying &amp;quot;c-colon-backslash&amp;quot;</text><parent_chain><item><author>karlshea</author><text>At least we&amp;#x27;ve mostly gotten away from &amp;quot;h-t-t-p-colon-slash-slash...&amp;quot;</text></item><item><author>edmccard</author><text>&amp;gt;having seen a lot of non-savvy users use Internet, I am firmly with WWW&lt;p&gt;As an anecdotal counterpoint, at our family Christmas, I mentioned a few different urls, spelling out &amp;quot;www&amp;quot; each time; one of my nieces said &amp;quot;why do you keep saying &amp;#x27;www&amp;#x27;&amp;quot;, and one of the other kids said &amp;quot;that&amp;#x27;s how old people find websites.&amp;quot; After some discussion, it turned out that nearly everyone over 30 habitually wrote urls with &amp;quot;www&amp;quot; at the front, and everyone under 18 always omitted it.</text></item><item><author>arihant</author><text>I understand the article walks through the technical aspects. However, having seen a lot of non-savvy users use Internet, I am firmly with WWW. Probably because of association and all major &amp;quot;established&amp;quot; companies using www, people associate it with strength. I have learned it to be important in similar ways that a .com extension is.&lt;p&gt;If the site did not have www, most people assumed it is probably made by kids, who do not have www yet. See, most people do not understand that www is not a domain like .com which you have to buy. So for average joe consumer, it signals strength. For an enterprise customer, it probably does too. So unless your product is for savvy users or zen-like designers, I&amp;#x27;d stick with www.&lt;p&gt;A lot of people think that naked domain is cleaner. It is actually not, since the average mind is conditioned to read www.x.com, and you have &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;x.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;x.com&lt;/a&gt;. It&amp;#x27;s cleaner in the sense that a face is cleaner without a nose.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>To www or not www</title><url>https://www.netlify.com/blog/2017/02/28/to-www-or-not-www/?utm_content=buffer67bee&amp;utm_medium=social&amp;utm_source=twitter.com&amp;utm_campaign=buffer</url></story>