Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

>These comments are disingenous[sic]. You didn't get confused by these things.

What right do you claim in calling the OP a liar? Do you not think that he is capable of observing his own emotional reaction to UI independent of his intellectual understanding of it? Are you really claiming that he disliked the iOS UI because his theory told him to?

That is utter hogwash. No sane person goes out of their way to assign an explanation of dislike when there wasn't dislike to begin with. It's entirely reasonable to dislike something, and it is also very reasonable to then check with theory as to why that might be the case. Moreover, if someone takes the trouble to a) make screenshots, b) write it up in a blog, and c) share it with the world then I think they deserver far better than to be called a liar.



> What right do you claim in calling the OP a liar?

I didn't, I said his comments were disingenuous (what was your "[sic]" for btw?). I meant exactly what I said. I wouldn't call it lying, I'd call it disingenuous (i.e. put-on naivety).

> Are you really claiming that he disliked the iOS UI because his theory told him to?

No. I'm saying his theories about what's confusing, while sometimes interesting, are not necessarily representative of what regular users will actually find confusing, and you'd need to do testing to find out. The problem is he presents them as if they're definitely true, with absolutely no evidence.


He put the [sic] there because you spelled "disingenuous" as "disingenous", lacking the penultimate "u." Clearly just a typo, as you have now spelled it correctly several times.


Wow, overreact much? The [sic] means you noticed a mis-spelling, clever you!


But you know it's spelled correctly, right? :)


>disingenous

...

>disingenuous

Nope


wow how did I look over that again and miss it, sorry :)


Check again.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: