upvote
It might be being suggested in that statement, but to me that reads that there's a potential opportunity there for a delayed AMA on this?

That if people were to email press@adafruit.com with a subject line (for example) of 'FLUX - AMA for later', these questions could be rounded up and the responses could then go onto a Adafruit blog page later, when and if applicable?

reply
limor and phil here, we would 100% welcome it, looking forward to telling our story very soon - pt & limor
reply
I'm curious, but I'm not sure if you can say - has Adafruit ever published anything about Flux?
reply
[flagged]
reply
new "altaccount2026" only posting twice, today, about this. we are very much looking forward to sharing our story, very very soon.

if you "altaccount2026 " really want a twitter archive of my photos of my kids, puppets, links to my articles, posts, and more, it may be available on some archiver.

we are very much looking forward to sharing our story.

press@adafruit.com for inquires ...

reply
Adafruit sure has a lot of stories they are eager to tell lately.
reply
You should read the linked article
reply
I have, and the article does not in any way address my question. You also seem to be a brand new user, so in case you're not aware, HN guidelines say to refrain from mentioning whether or not someone has read the link.
reply
As a long time reader I keep wondering how it is more conductive to the discourse to comment without reading than to point that the answers might be in the article someone ignored.
reply
Just reply with a quote from the article. They will understand they did not read carefully, and you can avoid the low-value 'read the article' snark (that might be false since often it is not actually in the article when somebody does that).
reply
My question wasn't "how to handle that better". I hope it's okay to point it out :)

I would also argue it's not "often" the case someone asking the obvious question seemingly answered in the article had actually read it. It happens, surely, but it's not a rule of thumb.

That's too meta for a thread here anyways, I think.

reply
It's an in-actionable "question" / comment. The rule does not claim one thing is better than the other. One is easily enforceable, the other is indemonstrable. If the point of this exchange is to better understand and use HN, the reason is because it is not hard to be constructive instead of throwing out non sequiturs.

And I didn't say it's '"often" the case someone asking the obvious question seemingly answered in the article had actually read it'. I said the person pointing it out while refusing to provide receipts or cordially engage is often wrong about what they think is obviously in the article. It's worthless noise regardless.

reply
I'd rather read "it's in the article you didn't read" than pretty much anything else.

The ideal case of course is that there are only legit questions and discussion from people who actually read what they are talking about. If they miss something that's fine as long as it's the honest exception. But this is not a thing that exists or can exist, so it doesn't count. It's not actually available to be a "What I'd like the most."

The next-most ideal case is when someone talks about something they didn't read, that no one else responds at all. The noise is the minimum possible noise from the original source and it just gets ignored. This aslo is not a real thing, and so not up for consideration.

What's left is some flavore of "noise". This is not avoidable. it will exist and the only choices are what form and flavor it takes.

I think it is most conductive for everyone, the poster, the bystanders, everyone, including people who don't like "noise", is the obvious and natural response. That it's the obvious and natural response for a reason.

Low value and snark may be true but it's irrelevant. It's still the best most productive reaction. (Within reason, 500 of the same response to one comment isn't very interesting reading, but multiple of the same agreeing response does serve a purpose which serves us all.)

That's what I mean by "I'd rather read that than almost anything else."

There are are no better options that actually exist.

As for the hall monitor aspect, telling people they shouldn't say the obvious most applicable thing is also hall monitor.

All in all, I just find the argument sorta valid but weak.

reply
[flagged]
reply
new empty "altaccount2026" with only this post, hi.

please email press@adafruit.com , limor and i are looking forward to telling our story very soon - pt & limor

reply
They have a few more if you turn showdead on. All about y’all.
reply
Almost makes you wonder if they're the sparkfun ceo and perpetuating that asinine feud.
reply
Can we see the content of the demand letter? It should have been linked to your post. It's difficult for us to evaluate the merits of their allegations otherwise.
reply