Hold on. It's reasonable to critique an article on the basis of the evidence given (or the lack thereof.) That is what the parent commenter is doing.
It is a big theme in HN, but why not give all ideas the same treatment? What is your thesis, your pitch, and have you made your case? What are the holes, where do you need work?
It is a big theme in HN, but why not give all ideas the same treatment? What is your thesis, your pitch, and have you made your case? What are the holes, where do you need work?
How do you evaluate ideas, if not by critique?