Obviously we should strive for better design, but greatly exaggerating is not a useful method of critique. The original post makes it sound like this information is almost impossible to find, when it is actually the second most prominent information on the page.
I don't think it's exaggerated at all. I looked at the page for like 30 seconds, thinking to myself, "What is this? I thought it was supposed to be like Hacker News, but for products. It appears to just be a bunch of people posting half-sentences that make no sense."
Seriously, the first post is "Go Dish HotelTonight for restaurants (SF)" WTF does that even mean? It's just a string of words that make no sense at all. It's literally incomprehensible to a typical reader.
The original post may have overstated the matter somewhat, but in the responses it received, the underlying issue was clarified to the point where it is easily recognizable and can be trivially addressed by the site developers if they so choose. That being the case, I can see a reasonable amount of utility in the original post, if only in that it prompted the analysis it did.
In general, I'm not fond of seeing "now, then, let's not be too harsh, shall we?"-type fussing on HN. Welcome to the Internet! People here aren't always as nice as you'd like them to be. This does not mean the things they say, however rudely, necessarily lack value.
I'm not suggesting that criticism shouldn't be harsh. I'm just suggesting that it should be accurate. The original post gave me the impression that either the poster hadn't looked at the site or else the site's design had been updated since it was written.
