You're being downvoted because your comment adds nothing to the discussion.

Comments don't need to be completely void of humour, but a comment that is only intended to be a joke isn't appreciated on Hacker News. I'm writing this as a courtesy as you are new here, and no-one has explained your mistake in your other low-value comments.

+1 for taking the time to explain (without too much snark, like the other comrade).

However I merely pointed out that this whole thing is wildly OTT by quoting an old meme.

Other than this what else can someone add in matter like these? It would be presumptuous (in my World view at least) to mouth opinions on how the World ought to be run when it is very clear to me that most of these things are like random chance set into motion where things become apparent only in hindsight. One example of this is the Joshua Bell experiment: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshua_Bell#Washington_Post_exp...

Thanks again for pointing this.

I don't comment much on topics where I feel I lack enough knowledge to add anything to the conversation, even if I find the post or conversation interesting. As a result, I only really comment on perhaps < 2-3% of the threads I read. I imagine this is similar to a lot of other HNers and it helps keep the signal-to-noise ratio relatively high.

With no snark intended, it boils down to: "If you have nothing to add, don't."

Two takeaways for me from today's experience:

1. >> even if I find the post or conversation interesting

The "interesting" bit is important. There have been (less popular) threads where I have noticed funny for funny's sake comments being left alone. A trending topic is a dangerous topic for comments where your comments will be read by more people who are likely to feel that it does or does not add much "value".

2. >> "If you have nothing to add, don't."

I don't think that sentiment can be expressed any differently, snark or not. :) You could have been more blunt too. I think that point's very valid within the HN subculture.

Irony is, both these takeaways are something that one picks up "after the fact", which in itself is ironic.

Ciao.

How about we downmod this post because "Wat? Now I've seen everything! !Bang!" adds nothing of value to the conversation?

Or we could downmod it because the only thing less funny than an old meme is an old meme that the teller felt the need to pre-emptively explain?

Or... how about downmodding because saying that people would only do so "because they didn't get it immediately" implies that you think they're slow-witted? Insulting your audience is never a good way to get a warm reception.

I preferred the explanation below that explained it all without too much snark. I think being humourous is a definite value add in itself. My two bits.

>> Insulting your audience is never a good way to get a warm reception.

I wasn't insulting anyone. I was going by my own comment's previous reception. A downvote, and nothing else to say why so. You may have a point that I assumed the worst (about people not getting it), but neither does downvote w/o even a cursory explanation.

It is not as if we dropped out of our mothers and learnt to navigate the World A-class, from day-one.

Edit: I appreciate your trying to point out HN culture to me, but it could always be done without excessive snark (IMHO).