5 ms·

oh Mr. Very Important and his "this should be the only piece of advice in this thread." A few days ago there was this post #1 on YC News about a guys whose kid

oh Mr. Very Important and his "this should be the only piece of advice in this thread." A few days ago there was this post #1 on YC News about a guys whose kid had this super-rare genetic disorder. Now, what, this guy should only listen to the Doctors and forget about turning on his own brain? I think that a good lawyer will listen to his Client and appreciate the Client who is interested enough in his case to propose solutions based on this readings/understanding of the Law. Or even discuss the stuff he saw here. Why on Earth everybody such a pain about legal advise and when it comes to much more important thing in life - health, life threatning disease - nobody's complaining when questions are asked and resolutions proposed. HN as I understand it is to exchange and share information. Not to censor it. Go to Cuba with your attitude dude. Or just relax.

jsprinkles 14y ago
That child's doctors personally examined the child, have expertise to deal with the situation, and are aware of any details which are important. A HN commenter has not personally met either party, in most cases is not a lawyer so he does not have expertise to deal with the situation, and most importantly, are only aware of what one party has told them. There is a significant difference.
- detst 14y ago
  You should take a look at an exchange between that guy and a guy with the bio: "Software development, web design ; interested in movies, animation and humor." [1] Should they both just shut up and let the big boys handle it? Or should he take another person's input and use his head to determine it's value? People are capable of offering valuable input without expertise and full details. As PG said, "Don't trust stuff you read on forums." He didn't say ignore it. It might even save his son's life. I'm strongly inclined to believe this can work in law as it can work with extremely rare medical conditions. [1] http://twitter.com/mattmight/status/207529584999153664 http://twitter.com/mattmight/status/207529584999153664

jsprinkles 14y ago

That child's doctors personally examined the child, have expertise to deal with the situation, and are aware of any details which are important. A HN commenter has not personally met either party, in most cases is not a lawyer so he does not have expertise to deal with the situation, and most importantly, are only aware of what one party has told them. There is a significant difference.

detst 14y ago
You should take a look at an exchange between that guy and a guy with the bio: "Software development, web design ; interested in movies, animation and humor." [1] Should they both just shut up and let the big boys handle it? Or should he take another person's input and use his head to determine it's value? People are capable of offering valuable input without expertise and full details. As PG said, "Don't trust stuff you read on forums." He didn't say ignore it. It might even save his son's life. I'm strongly inclined to believe this can work in law as it can work with extremely rare medical conditions. [1] http://twitter.com/mattmight/status/207529584999153664 http://twitter.com/mattmight/status/207529584999153664