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

Twitter’s Plan to Get People to Stop Yelling at Each Other

buzzfeednews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 198 posts

Re: Twitter’s Plan to Get People to Stop Yelling at Each Other

#151

Post by kprjo »

onion2k wrote: post #141
oblio wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honest question: which people? HN is too US/California/Bay Area centric for my tastes (most people here are probably from there), it talks a bit too much about money and jobs, but it's still a decent resource.

I was wrong about the name. It's "the angry orange website". https://twitter.com/search?q="angry%20orange%20website" - that's just a sample of HN's 'haters'. HN has its share of people who are awful and post horrible opinions (see the discussion about any article on JavaScript, health care, wealth, etc). I believe HN has some value left which is why I still post here, but I can absolutely see why people have abandone…

I wonder why they call it that. After all you get banned here if you post right-wing opinions. It's practically a safe space for them.

Re: Twitter’s Plan to Get People to Stop Yelling at Each Other

#152

Post by HNLurker2 »

jrootabega wrote: post #146
carriers wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I don't get this at all. I think it's even deeper than designing for controversy. I'm "older" (40s), though I work on products used by younger people, so I don't think this is just me being old, but I can't follow a conversation on twitter at all. When there's a link from HackerNews to Twitter, I click on it and sometimes see the thing mentioned in the HN title, and sometimes don't. Then there's a bunch of stuf…

Twitter, reddit, slack and others are meant for constant asynchronous engagement, mostly by schoolkids, and not random access or long-lived discussion. Coming from the message board world, the difference in the attention spans involved is pretty frustrating.

And 9gag. Strong market for short attention spans.

Re: Twitter’s Plan to Get People to Stop Yelling at Each Other

#153

Post by astrange »

kprjo wrote: post #151
onion2k wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was wrong about the name. It's "the angry orange website". https://twitter.com/search?q="angry%20orange%20website" - that's just a sample of HN's 'haters'. HN has its share of people who are awful and post horrible opinions (see the discussion about any article on JavaScript, health care, wealth, etc). I believe HN has some value left which is why I still post here, but I can absolutely see why people have abandone…

I wonder why they call it that. After all you get banned here if you post right-wing opinions. It's practically a safe space for them.

HN has a pretty cynical viewpoint on everything. A comment doesn't really feel like a contribution when you're writing it unless you disagree with the parent (like so).

People will find all sorts of reasons to think the article is wrong based on "mid-brow dismissal" or will say any public figure or company is lying about any statement they make.

Plus there's no emojis.

Re: Twitter’s Plan to Get People to Stop Yelling at Each Other

#154

Post by kprjo »

All the problems I read about Twitter are basically PEBCAK.

"people say outrageous things!" okay so don't go ahead and read them. As an example, replies to Trump are always a shitfest. Don't read them.

"there are evil nazis!" okay so don't follow them.

"even if I don't do these two, other people I follow retweet those and I get to see them!" okay so mute, unfollow, or block that person.

"even if I don't do these two, other people I don't know say outrageous things or follow evil nazis" that's none of your business.

Twitter served me well for a long time, if you've tried to "figure it out" and couldn't (when it's the simplest shit ever) then just don't use it. Why should all services be catered to the lowest common denominator? The only thing I agree with is that they shouldn't show tweets other people liked in your timeline. But the rest is simply bullshit. It's like some people want Twitter to become something it's not and it's never been.

Re: Twitter’s Plan to Get People to Stop Yelling at Each Other

#155

Post by astrange »

boapnuaput wrote: post #90
bradleyankrom wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This gets suggested as the solution to privacy/junk content/etc for every social platform - why have none of them (that I am aware of) adopted this model?

Today, you learned about Something Awful[0], a social forum that charges a nominal fee for accounts[1]. After being banned by administrators, a rule-breaker must pay another fee if they wish to be reinstated. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Something_Awful [1] https://secure.somethingawful.com/products/register.php

It's not going so well, maybe because there's no recurring fees. Lowtax had to start a patreon after some medical bills lately.

Not sure what the atmosphere is like these days, but the admins were always so constantly mad for no reason you couldn't even post in a thread next to them or they'd ban you. They have real bad irony poisoning.

Re: Twitter’s Plan to Get People to Stop Yelling at Each Other

#156

Post by kurtisc »

nullc wrote: post #99

The product has "twit" right in the name. Twitter is where you go to read twits or become one. Why is anyone surprised? From its tiny size limits to its byzantine threading and inability to follow all of one person without creating an account (which they often instantly ban, even if it does nothing but read)... Twitter is a communications medium constructed in a way that maximizes the ability ferment outrage and mini…

The UK Prime Minister made the twit joke in 2009 and it was trite then too.

Re: Twitter’s Plan to Get People to Stop Yelling at Each Other

#157

Post by Mizza »

aloisdg wrote: post #125
chrisbrandow wrote: post #118

I think human conversations at scale with strangers is inherently difficult to solve. We are prone to quick, context-life reactions. Threading management only gets you so far…

HN, Reddit and most newsgroups are not so bad.

HN is great because of the strict moderation. If there are any good subreddits left, it's because they're well moderated. Some of it is cultural and demographic, but I think moderation is really the key missing piece in all of these conversations about "why does the internet suck now?"

Want to build a better Twitter alternative? Train the moderation AI: No memes, no reposts, no shitposts.

Re: Twitter’s Plan to Get People to Stop Yelling at Each Other

#158

Post by kprjo »

astrange wrote: post #153
kprjo wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder why they call it that. After all you get banned here if you post right-wing opinions. It's practically a safe space for them.

HN has a pretty cynical viewpoint on everything. A comment doesn't really feel like a contribution when you're writing it unless you disagree with the parent (like so). People will find all sorts of reasons to think the article is wrong based on "mid-brow dismissal" or will say any public figure or company is lying about any statement they make. Plus there's no emojis.

Yeah, on the other hand Twitter is all roses, and those people always side with public figures and companies, lol.

Maybe those guys would like HN better if they could use avatars so they could show off their black lipstick and half-shaved heads.

Re: Twitter’s Plan to Get People to Stop Yelling at Each Other

#159

Post by Traster »

Arguments happen on twitter because you have lots of different communities that frequently accidentally collide. It's fascinating. Basically as it turns out communities on the internet work calmly when they're homogenous - this is the beauty of reddit. When communities interact you get chaos, because suddenly you're confronted with thousands of people you disagree with. On reddit that's called brigading and can get you banned, but on twitter it's built into the platform.

The result is that on reddit you get isolated communities - some of which are thoroughly toxic and churn out some of the worst of humanity. Twitter doesn't create that isolated groupthink environment but instead it is just a constant warfare between communities.

What I don't understand thouhg, is why twitter thinks its a good idea to give away the one thing that makes their platform differentiated.

Re: Twitter’s Plan to Get People to Stop Yelling at Each Other

#160

Post by rusk »

Traster wrote: post #159

Arguments happen on twitter because you have lots of different communities that frequently accidentally collide. It's fascinating. Basically as it turns out communities on the internet work calmly when they're homogenous - this is the beauty of reddit. When communities interact you get chaos, because suddenly you're confronted with thousands of people you disagree with. On reddit that's called brigading and can get y…

> why twitter thinks its a good idea to give away the one thing that makes their platform differentiated.

They've been doing this for a while in fairness, cut-by-cut:

- algorithmic timeline (that can't be disabled!)

- 240 character messages

- "Threads"

- "verified" users (that get different treatment)

All in a vain effort to take what was a beautifully simple peer-to-peer microblogging platform and create something more like snapfacestergrameddit.

And still no "edit" button.

Post reply on HN