1. 7

    The Naming Things book

    you’ll want to get the book!

    We’ll explore these in detail in the book.

    The book explores these

    these are explored in more detail in the book

    To learn more about them and see examples of how to apply them, click the button below: GET THE BOOK

    Sorry, but I flagged this as spam

    1. 3

      This is not spam, this is bad content. I’m not saying this to insult the author. It is my opinion, which I base on the following argument:

      The article lists some mistakes you can make in naming things. That list is not exhaustive. Nor does it give practical hints how to name things correctly. Nor does it provide examples. As a reader, you can get more information by reading the Wikipedia article on naming conventions.

      On my blog I have also written bad content in the past. I bet that I will write some bad content in the future. It happens, get over it. Maybe the author will be able to write a better article the next time he posts here. If you want, you can send me your article before you publish it and I will give you constructive criticism.

      1. 5

        Bad/poor/low-effort content in itself is ok and adequate reaction to it is to ignore (maybe downvote) it and try providing constructive criticism. Bad/poor/low-effort content immediately followed by an ad-like call to action (“subscribe for real actual contents I pinky promise” in this case) is fully worth of being flagged as spam/ad. There’s a world of a difference: in the first case I can assume idealistic intentions with poor execution; in latter case I can only assume monetization intentions. I don’t claim it bad, but if only that this platform is not intended as an ads aggregator AFAIU.

        1. 1

          I see your point and I agree that the CTAs are unfortunate. I understand why one would decide to flag the article as spam.

        2. 1

          Thanks for the constructive criticism. (I’m the author.) I appreciate the feedback and agree with all of your points; I’ll use this to improve content going forward. The intention of the post was to see what people would think of these principles, but the feedback here so far has focused on other areas, so I’ll work to improve those. In case it’s helpful to know, I’m writing the book in parallel to this, and the book’s beta readers have also been giving me very valuable feedback that has some overlap with what has been mentioned here.

        3. 2

          I just looked at it.

          FWIW I say this is not enough to qualify as spam. I’ve not upvoted it because it wasn’t interesting to me but not spam. And in my opinion “spam” just like “hate speech” is terms that should be reserved for actual “spam” and actual “hate speech” and not “stuff I don’t like” or “stuff I don’t agree with”.

          It is totally ok to write less than perfect blog posts that recommends the authors book.

          When does it cross into spam/blog spam?

          • you get it in the form of unsolicited mail
          • someone posts it multiple times to your forum
          • when it is about something completely different (you search for a JS implementation of Spring Framework and get a page that contains the relevant keywords, in white text on white background)

          That said, posting history for that domain us interesting, but I’ll leave that to the mods, I might be misreading: https://lobste.rs/domain/namingthings.co

          1. 0

            (I’m the author.) Thanks for the feedback on this; I agree that it was heavy-handed. I’ve updated this part of the blog post to deemphasize it and I’ve removed the CTA button.

          1. 6

            I don’t know if this is spam, but I found the content to have little substance. There aren’t any example, something to learn from. Thus, understanding of each of the “principles” is left to the personal understanding of the words describing each of them.

            1. 3

              I was also a bit annoyed by the lack of specific examples. Now it’s just a list of platitudes. They’re true, but it makes sense only if you already know it.

              1. 1

                Thanks for the feedback! (I’m the author.) It’s helpful to know that examples are important; I knew this previously, but wanted to see what people would think of a post that was focused only on principles. Now I know :)

                1. 1

                  Love to see authors growing, that’s what Lobsters is all about ;) Onward & upward!