Thanks! Hmm. I tried to answer but I'm still finding it unclear. Can you rephrase with less abstraction and more verbose specifics?

Edit: It might not clear what I'm not finding clear. It's not clear to me who you're referring to in the first sentence, or what "get" means in "get the requirements", or what you're referring to when you say "the requirements". It's not clear to me what the "that" is in "that's what's not clear to me". I don't understand what you thought I should have clarified but didn't. I'm not sure even how to begin approaching your last sentence.

I really do think that a more verbose rephrase would resolve all these.

"At least part of it is the same reason you might want to hang out with people already skilled in your disciplines: you get to go do the advanced stuff, instead of getting the other people up to speed."

In that case you can give "requirements" what is needed to work with you in your tempo, right?

What the discussion is about (at least to me) is not about the right of picking your people to go together with (ofc you can do that) but about the specific, concrete "requirements" which the "new platform" implements but HN does not.

Thanks!

> In that case you can give "requirements" what is needed to work with you in your tempo, right?

This part is clear. Yes. I would give those requirements, although probably not with term - not like it's a job interview or something.

> What the discussion is about (at least to me)

This is clear.

> is not about the right of picking your people to go together with

This is not clear? It's a very convoluted sentence.

> but about the specific, concrete "requirements"

This is mostly clear. What do you see as the requirements being implemented by the new platform?

"What do you see as the requirements being implemented by the new platform?"

Yes, that should be my question for you! :)