Ah, the what.cd strategy. Minus the exclusive content.
Man, I miss what.cd, not just for the content but for the obsessive users they had and the collections they made. Want all albums with a shoe as the cover? They have a collection for that. Want good music to start a journey into classical music in the 1800s? They have a collection for that. I mostly used it to discover great music, and the void that what.cd left has yet to be filled for me.
Why Lobste.rs Is Better Than Hacker News
51–60 of 179 posts
Re: Why Lobste.rs Is Better Than Hacker News
#52The down-vote feature (for those who didn't read the article: you have to provide feedback to down-vote) is something I've spent years saying HN badly needs. These days I just don't bother posting most of the time because while I shouldn't be bothered by abuse of negative rep; you can't help be pissed off when you've spent a short while including detail only for someone who doesn't understand the subject or has a per…
I think HN's current system of keeping a limited window open so that comments that in general are disagreed with will be downvoted makes sense. Honestly, I think it's even kind of brilliant, and I am not sure what system would be better.
Re: Why Lobste.rs Is Better Than Hacker News
#53Re: Why Lobste.rs Is Better Than Hacker News
#54And HN is arguably better for not being invite-only. There are so many articles on HN where the top comment is by somebody with deep domain knowledge who provides some kind of original insight that fits into the low length and polish expectations of a comment, but would never have become a formal blog post. Invite-only communities intentionally give up on that kind of discourse for... what? Easier moderation?
Karma points enable this convergence because they are the only metric that we can do data analysis on comment quality, and so build into the various user interfaces.
So we can all think of many combinations of karma and account - 4chan, reddit, hackernews, youtube (which was trying to require given names); The concept of a website displaying account progeny is both an affront to privacy (in both directions) and a remarkable way to improve comment quality, which I make no effort to define.
The invitation only model seems to scale only so far, as all "cool parties" start off cool because only the cool people are invited (cool in this sense means compatible: consider both artificial and natural boundaries such as a physical party of people congregating for social purposes, a private web forum, or even the internet itself, which was initially available to only those that could enter and navigate it). We have euphemisms such as "Eternal September" to connote the perpetual ruining by outsiders infiltrating what was previously more private.
I vastly prefer to allow the unsanitized comments to enter a feed, and root through them so that people are not behaving as though being watched. It's exhausting but because both extremes are allowed to exist, the comments with the highest signal to noise ratio are often the most honest. Anecdotally I have found (exceedingly rarely) the most honest, insightful, or inclusive comments are on a site like 4chan, with the least restrictions and the least incentive to build a reputation (it's impossible). On hackernews, and I know I am projecting, I believe that we artificially act better than we are, on average, because we have something here to lose. A clever post turns into a job reference, or a reference to work becomes discovered by a future boss, etc.
Ultimately I am glad that all of these combinations exist. Losing a cultivated registry of who's who would have an immediate loss of largely high quality comments, but losing the wild west of anonymous bilge leaves us with no place to be our most honest, regardless of how much or how little it contributes.
Re: Why Lobste.rs Is Better Than Hacker News
#55And HN is arguably better for not being invite-only. There are so many articles on HN where the top comment is by somebody with deep domain knowledge who provides some kind of original insight that fits into the low length and polish expectations of a comment, but would never have become a formal blog post. Invite-only communities intentionally give up on that kind of discourse for... what? Easier moderation?
> There are so many articles on HN where the top comment is by somebody with deep domain knowledge who provides some kind of original insight that fits into the low length and polish expectations of a comment This is now a myth. HN used to be like this but look for yourself, it's no longer like this. It's no longer worth my time to dig for worthwhile nuggets in the HN comments nor is it worth my time to post a high q…
It doesn’t happen often, but HN doesn’t often discuss things outside of its wheelhouse either. Usually we’re litigating matters of opinion, usually about whether JavaScript is bad or not.
Re: Why Lobste.rs Is Better Than Hacker News
#56And while I like the idea that anyone can join, it would be really nice to limit the down vote for the same reasons outlined in other comments here.
Someone I work with put it bluntly when they said "Just post a polite but witty reply to something on Hacker News and watch your points tumble like corporate stock after a security breach."
Re: Why Lobste.rs Is Better Than Hacker News
#57The down-vote feature (for those who didn't read the article: you have to provide feedback to down-vote) is something I've spent years saying HN badly needs. These days I just don't bother posting most of the time because while I shouldn't be bothered by abuse of negative rep; you can't help be pissed off when you've spent a short while including detail only for someone who doesn't understand the subject or has a per…
Either way I have no clue. I read a comment recently about setting up a graphics pipeline that seemed reasonable enough but was downvoted to hell. I would have liked to know why.
Re: Why Lobste.rs Is Better Than Hacker News
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the point here is that if someone starts spouting rubbish, the person who invited them loses "face" - it reflects badly on them. So invitations aren't hard to come by, provided you have a reasonable reputation for saying things that are sensible. This is a throwback to an early age when you would never talk to someone in social circles without first being introduced. If someone turned out to be a "bad sort" t…
Doesn't that just cause a massive filter bubble effect?
It's a choice, and it has consequences.
One thing I'd like to see added to HN is the ability for me to assign trustworthiness scores to other users, and then filter based on that. There are people here who I've come to know will provide value, even if their views are unpalatable, and their karma is low. There are others who have reasonably high karma, and yet who I know add little of value (for me!) to conversations.
Again, that would risk a filter-bubble, but it would reduce the number of comments I need to wade through before getting to those of value -- all from my personal view, of course, and your judgements would be different.
Re: Why Lobste.rs Is Better Than Hacker News
#59And HN is arguably better for not being invite-only. There are so many articles on HN where the top comment is by somebody with deep domain knowledge who provides some kind of original insight that fits into the low length and polish expectations of a comment, but would never have become a formal blog post. Invite-only communities intentionally give up on that kind of discourse for... what? Easier moderation?
> There are so many articles on HN where the top comment is by somebody with deep domain knowledge who provides some kind of original insight that fits into the low length and polish expectations of a comment This is now a myth. HN used to be like this but look for yourself, it's no longer like this. It's no longer worth my time to dig for worthwhile nuggets in the HN comments nor is it worth my time to post a high q…
Re: Why Lobste.rs Is Better Than Hacker News
#60And HN is arguably better for not being invite-only. There are so many articles on HN where the top comment is by somebody with deep domain knowledge who provides some kind of original insight that fits into the low length and polish expectations of a comment, but would never have become a formal blog post. Invite-only communities intentionally give up on that kind of discourse for... what? Easier moderation?
I've had my projects (see my hn profile) or my blog posts hit lobsters a bunch of times and finding myself unable to respond to the comments as I don't have an account there.