Slow and steady, this poem will win your heart

1 day ago (nytimes.com)

>She lives below luck-level, never imagining some lottery will change her load of pottery to wings.

nails the mindset where imagining change doesn’t even happen. it’s not about failing to win. it’s about never thinking you’re in the draw. that kind of mental floor sits deep.

  • Aaaagh nooo, why have you converted this lovely poem into a feeble fable about a "winning mindset"?

    • maybe my bad, but that's what i can infer at 0th minute after reading it. throw some light if I missed the whole point

At first I thought the page was frozen, but then I realized it was designed to make you read one line at a time. It felt a bit awkward at first, but after a while the rhythm started to feel right.

You don’t see many websites that ask you to slow down, but for a poem like this, it actually works. It’s not something that grabs you instantly, but if you give it a few quiet minutes, it kind of gets under your skin.

Why this poem in particular?

[flagged]

  • Not an affiliate, nor a fan of nytimes.. Not sure why the title was changed and the context removed from the submission. I was highlighting an interesting ux where the review of the poem appears in context to the verses. And I could skip login in my private window in brave.

    • You seem to be a new contributor to HN, so, welcome!

      It's our policy and well-established convention here that we use the same title as the original article, with the only exception being if the original title is misleading or baity, in which case we'll try and lift an appropriate phrase from the article (including the URL, or a subtitle, or a photo caption).

      A title that editorializes or makes a meta-commentary about the article is against that policy.

      It's nothing personal! We make these changes to titles every day, and over the years we've found it serves our purposes very well.

      2 replies →

  • We know it's an imperfect solution but it's the least-worst solution. We'd lose far more than we'd gain if we banned all paywalled content, as it's such a huge share of the total body of content (esp. when weighted by masthead prominence and traffic) on the web. But it's also a policy that it doesn't belong on HN if there's no easy way around the paywall. We don't want to list anything that's not freely accessible for everyone, reasonably easily.