Alt.techcrunch.die.die.die
11–20 of 69 posts
Re: Alt.techcrunch.die.die.die
#12Yes, the site has influence, but to think it's the only way to get noticed is only adding fuel to the fire.
Re: Alt.techcrunch.die.die.die
#13I don't read Techcrunch unless someone points me to a story that sounds like it might be interesting which is rare. However, people seem to read, and their traffic hasn't suffered, so I doubt that the site is going to change anything soon. For that matter, who cares what Techcruch is writing about. By moaning about it here, we're giving it airtime that could be used for something more useful. Ignore it, and perhaps o…
yes, sorry. I'm slightly horrified that my rant is #1 on HN. In a nice way though.
Re: Alt.techcrunch.die.die.die
#14It will then be more fun.
Re: Alt.techcrunch.die.die.die
#15Re: Alt.techcrunch.die.die.die
#16Re: Alt.techcrunch.die.die.die
#17Its problem is the commenting system. Needs something like Digg.
Re: Alt.techcrunch.die.die.die
#18Should I add downvotes on stories, for users over a certain karma threshold?
Re: Alt.techcrunch.die.die.die
#19CenterNetworks Mashable! VentureBeat Read/Write Web
Re: Alt.techcrunch.die.die.die
#20This is the top story on Hacker News? Embarrassing. Should I add downvotes on stories, for users over a certain karma threshold?
A lot of people ask for downvotes when they're particularly annoyed by a particular story, but they're always told to just go vote up something good.
A more moderate change might be to allow people to undo their upvotes if they decide the story wasn't worth saving after all.
You have more data and experience than anybody else. Try out what you think will be best and undo it if it doesn't work.