Live data from Hacker News

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

hackersmacker.org

61–70 of 179 posts

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

#62
post #6

I wonder what the second order effects of this on the HN karma system will be. It'll create a graph of karmic supernodes perhaps. Say I green-blob someone with a big reputation here, say jacquesm; no doubt lots of other people will do the same. The friends-of-friends icon is going to appear widely but it'll all be a single edge away from Jacques' node. Is that much of a signal? I dunno. That's 30 seconds of thought a…

> Version two: hide foes? That's a good idea. Here's my bad idea: the extension auto downvotes foes and auto upvotes friends. :)

automations get your account in trouble, it's against the rules

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

#64
post #52

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?”

favorite / potato Although there are some commenters I would want to follow because they are potato. There is something so magical about some of the more delulu Take Havers around here.

potato / tomato?

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

#69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, okay-- though that doesn't mean the author can't do better, if I'm not just being too nitpicky.

The last thing HN needs is to become more like Slashdot.

In Soviet Russia, Slashdot becomes HN!

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

#70

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?”

I'd suggest to move even beyond "engage/ignore".

This is HN. The focus should be "does this person provide interesting or thought provoking comments", not "relationships" or "engagement".

There are plenty of HN commenters whose opinions I absolutely dislike (I'm sure it's mutual ;), but I still read them - they are at least well reasoned or point out missing facts. I don't have to like them to learn from them.

Post reply on HN