Fascinating use of language. Superstition implies belief in fate / deity.
It doesn't surprise to see this written now, even if only ironically.
"The algorithm cannot be understood by anyone" - which is a fact. So we summon the fates to describe its expected behaviour.
If this comment seems personal, that wasn't intended. I really don't know how people in SEO tend to communicate. But I just heard this kind of language for the first time. So it's just a sign of the times.
I can't tell if this is a bit where you play the oblivious pedant, or if you can't tell they were referring to this policy. Either way, I don't think they were suggesting some cosmic influence.
@Kye
No pedantry from here. I had already understood the policy.
So this comment wasn't about the policy, it was all about the language. You seem to wish to understand, so ...
It was a pretty wide tangent from the start. I imagine (perhaps incorrectly) that it may eventually become common for people to understand algorithm-lore as say the Runes were once understood. I interpreted the language used here as a harbinger.
I am vouching for this comment. The choice of words seems interesting to me too. You don't have to agree with it but I do not see any sign of commenting in bad faith - I think this comment should be unflagged.
I think the mistake was "Superstition implies belief in fate / deity." After reading the whole thing, I guess what they probably meant was dry linguisting commentary, but on first glance it looks like they're saying the person they're replying to is irrational.
This is a mistake I used to make. It's fun to pull apart language, but to the person whose language is being analysed, it often feels like mockery. It's important to make it 100% crystal clear your fun analysis isn't about the person. Make it clear it's an aside by focusing on the point before moving on to the postscript with a clear topic shift.
>> It's important to make it 100% crystal clear your fun analysis isn't about the person.
>> If this comment seems personal, that wasn't intended.
That wasn't an edit, it was in my first commit. 100% Crystal clear?
I appreciate you're trying to help but, in doing so please don't belittle my comment as "fun analysis". Though it mightn't have come over perfectly, I meant it. And it's important. To me at least.
