<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>epicide</author><text>I quite enjoyed it. I liked that they didn&amp;#x27;t just give you a checklist of &amp;quot;things to do&amp;quot;, but instead gave you broad &amp;quot;laws&amp;quot; that you can interpret how you see fit coupled with the reasoning behind that law. This keeps each one applicable to multiple scenarios and isn&amp;#x27;t prescriptive.&lt;p&gt;I think a lot of the hate comes from people seeing that it&amp;#x27;s about UX and want to immediately tear it down for not being how they personally prefer information (apparently, if it&amp;#x27;s not the most information dense way possible, they don&amp;#x27;t like it).&lt;p&gt;I actually think having a distinct picture and making you scroll a bit helped me. The distinct picture is a good mnemonic and makes each law stand out from the others (especially by using different colors). If you had them all squished together with no scrolling necessary and no colors, it would be hard to distinguish between them. Sure, it might be more efficient to scroll through, but that in itself might be the point: reading through something and actually grokking it does not happen by scrolling through it as fast as possible, so why optimize for that?&lt;p&gt;It looks fine on mobile to me. The only real complaint I had was losing my position on hitting back, but I wouldn&amp;#x27;t jump to the conclusion that they consciously made it do that. Probably just a bug&amp;#x2F;oversight.</text><parent_chain><item><author>have_faith</author><text>Did anyone else enjoy it for what it was? I get the criticisms, you want the web to be homogenised and free from any form of expression that doesn&amp;#x27;t present every piece of information in it&amp;#x27;s most human-machine digestible form, I get it. But it was pretty simple to use and the flair was minimal. I don&amp;#x27;t understand the pitchforks. There&amp;#x27;s a few minor annoyances like the back button not working as expected, but they are very minor for a site so small.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Laws of UX</title><url>https://lawsofux.com/</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>cptskippy</author><text>&amp;gt; I get the criticisms, you want the web to be homogenised and free from any form of expression that doesn&amp;#x27;t present every piece of information in it&amp;#x27;s most human-machine digestible form, I get it.&lt;p&gt;You don&amp;#x27;t get it, you just minimized and dismissed everyone&amp;#x27;s objections to this site.&lt;p&gt;As a power point presentation, this site is great.  As a line item on your resume, sure.&lt;p&gt;As a resource that someone can use and reference, it&amp;#x27;s awful.</text><parent_chain><item><author>have_faith</author><text>Did anyone else enjoy it for what it was? I get the criticisms, you want the web to be homogenised and free from any form of expression that doesn&amp;#x27;t present every piece of information in it&amp;#x27;s most human-machine digestible form, I get it. But it was pretty simple to use and the flair was minimal. I don&amp;#x27;t understand the pitchforks. There&amp;#x27;s a few minor annoyances like the back button not working as expected, but they are very minor for a site so small.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Laws of UX</title><url>https://lawsofux.com/</url></story>