Quoting Armin Ronacher
Armin Ronacher expresses frustration with the quality of issue reports submitted by users. He emphasizes the importance of clear and accurate descriptions of problems, rather than reworded or overly complicated submissions. Ronacher advocates for a straightforward format that includes the command run, expected outcome, actual outcome, and any relevant error messages.
- ▪Many issue reports lack clarity and are not in the submitter's own voice.
- ▪Reworded submissions often lead to inaccurate conclusions and confusion.
- ▪Ronacher suggests a simple format for issue reporting to improve clarity.
Simon Willison files mainly under blogs. We currently carry 51 of its stories.
Story provenance
Source · retrieval · rights · ranking — open for full record
inspect →
Attribution is not the same as permission. This drawer separates discovery metadata, excerpts, WeSearch-generated summaries, reuse status, and whether the publisher receives the visit. Nothing here claims a legal grant the publisher has not made.
Record
| Original publisher | Simon Willison |
| Canonical URL | https://simonwillison.net/2026/May/24/armin-ronacher/#atom-everything |
| Publication time | 2026-05-24T18:46:53+00:00 |
| Retrieval time | 2026-05-24T19:07:33.849Z |
| Last seen | 2026-05-24T19:07:33.849Z |
| Headline source | Publisher (no WeSearch rewrite) |
| Excerpt source | publisher body |
| Excerpt method | First ~120 words (~800 chars) of extracted publisher body, fair-use limited. |
| Summary | WeSearch · cerebras-chat (WeSearch summarizer) |
| Summary source text | contentText |
| Citation coverage | Summary is a WeSearch-generated derivative; primary citation is the original publisher URL. |
| Cluster | h-OAEO0l-lp- |
| Cluster logic | Grouped by semantic title/content similarity across sources within a rolling window. Same-publisher template collisions are excluded from coverage comparison. |
| Ranking reason | Story pages are not engagement-ranked. Hub feeds use recency, with optional source-diversified chronological ordering (cap consecutive stories per source). No personalized ranking. |
| Publisher visit | Yes — open original |
| Substitutes article? | No — link-out required for full text |
Rights status (four layers)
WeSearch handling by dimension
| Indexing | May the item be indexed (stored, ranked, made findable)? | Allowed |
| Snippet | May a short excerpt of the publisher's text be shown? | Allowed |
| AI summary | May WeSearch generate its own short summary of the article? | Limited |
| Retrieval / RAG | May the content be exposed for third-party retrieval-augmented generation? | Not asserted |
| Model training | May the content be used to train AI models? | Not asserted |
| Commercial reuse | May the content be reused commercially? | Not permitted |
Basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed. Contact: [email protected]. Reviewed: 2026-07-24.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
The most frustrating failure mode right now is that people submit issues that are not in their own voice. They contain an observed problem somewhere, but it has been thrown into a clanker and the clanker reworded it and made a huge mess of it. Typically, it was prompted so badly that the conclusions produced are more often than not inaccurate but always full of confidence. The result is complete guesswork on root causes, fake-minimal repros, suggested implementation strategies, analogies to adjacent but often the wrong code, and long lists of error classes that might or might not matter. [...] So at least personally, I increasingly want issue reports to be condensed to what the human actually observed: I ran this command. I expected this to happen. This happened instead.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at Simon Willison.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from Simon Willison
