Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Hacker Smacker – Spot great (and terrible) HN commenters at a glance

hackersmacker.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 179 posts

Re: Show HN: Hacker Smacker – Spot great (and terrible) HN commenters at a glance

#141

Post by TonyStr »

jimnotgym wrote: post #132

I'm interested in peoples thoughts about this. There are people in here that I generally respect, but on certain subjects I have seen comments that are not helpful. If I saw one of them first I might click 'foe' and then ignore them in the future. And this seems normal. I have a friend in real life who I like talking to, we share some views, and vehemently disagree on other subjects. He likes to bring them up and I t…

This is my concern as well. IMO, one of the great aspects of HN is the semi-anonymity (no profile pics, names are just strings that you probably don't memorize unless you see the same name often, no visible upvotes, etc.). This makes us take the comments and submissions at face value, evaluating the content rather than relying on past experiences with the author, or other people's evaluation of it (upvotes).

I feel that any system which injects opinions into comments/submissions before you read and process it, work against the principles of Hacker News. A system like this might be great for a community full of trolls, but another one of Hacker News' strengths is it's heavy moderation. I see maybe <5% troll/bad-taste comments, and most of those are already flagged and [dead].

Re: Show HN: Hacker Smacker – Spot great (and terrible) HN commenters at a glance

#143

Post by ehnto »

ineedasername wrote: post #4

I’d encourage a change of labels away from “friend/foe”. It may seem minor but the subtle loaded nature of those paired terms encourages an adversarial stance rather than one of productive discourse. It’s not catchy so there’s probably better than this but, just as an example— “engage/ignore” could better signal to the user a neutral “do I want to bother with this person?”

Agree, one of the great parts of HN is that we can still have wholehearted, earnest discussions with people we disagree with. I don't think bringing the combative nature of other platforms makes sense here. We're not at war with eachother or people we disagree with, as much as most media outlets want that to be the case.

Re: Show HN: Hacker Smacker – Spot great (and terrible) HN commenters at a glance

#144

Post by magicalhippo »

zzo38computer wrote: post #48

I would prefer to do the opposite, where everything is displayed in chronological order (with an option to display by threads or not; even if not you can still find what each one is a reply to) regardless of voting and regardless of who wrote them.

I've been wishing for a News (NNTP) portal for HN. Would solve that as well as making it easier to follow larger threads by allowing you to track read/unread.

Mostly because I really miss newsgroups though.

Re: Show HN: Hacker Smacker – Spot great (and terrible) HN commenters at a glance

#145

Post by jimnotgym »

p0w3n3d wrote: post #138
jimnotgym wrote: post #132

I'm interested in peoples thoughts about this. There are people in here that I generally respect, but on certain subjects I have seen comments that are not helpful. If I saw one of them first I might click 'foe' and then ignore them in the future. And this seems normal. I have a friend in real life who I like talking to, we share some views, and vehemently disagree on other subjects. He likes to bring them up and I t…

But marking someone as foe based on their first comment might be very misleading, not to speak of good practice of discussion despite of agreement or disagreement. I'm coming to the stage of my life that I try (sometimes hardly) to speak with people with which I disagree. It's my crusade against cancel culture. People are more than one dimensional and even if we disagree on one two dimensions we might agree on others…

My comment was not clear enough, on review. I am in full agreement with you

Re: Show HN: Hacker Smacker – Spot great (and terrible) HN commenters at a glance

#146

Post by croisillon »

Aeglaecia wrote: post #82
croisillon wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're on HN and you look in the comments and can't tell who the toxic one is, it's you.

I believe the argument is that introducing personal aspects like this friend foe business inherently serves to increase argumentative bias and reduce quality of discussion. personally this seems like a slop project either way , so regardless as to how beneficial it could be, I'm still going to behave toxically towards it - if you really love or hate someone so much , you would have memorized their name already !

yeah it's another game entirely, first there are 2 camps and then more and more... but that has nothing to do with a discussion anymore

Re: Show HN: Hacker Smacker – Spot great (and terrible) HN commenters at a glance

#147

Post by michaelbuckbee »

ineedasername wrote: post #4

I’d encourage a change of labels away from “friend/foe”. It may seem minor but the subtle loaded nature of those paired terms encourages an adversarial stance rather than one of productive discourse. It’s not catchy so there’s probably better than this but, just as an example— “engage/ignore” could better signal to the user a neutral “do I want to bother with this person?”

"signal/noise" possibly?
Post reply on HN