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

1% rule

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 158 posts

Re: 1% rule

#141

Post by dang »

alecco wrote: post #105
dang wrote: post #23

I once ran the numbers for HN and was surprised at how closely they matched this rule. Maybe I'll do it again. Edit: here are some estimates. We don't track enough to know about distinct users, so all we can do is guess. The number of accounts that have posted to HN this year, divided by the number of IP addresses that have accessed HN, is 0.008. How close that is to the '1% rule' depends on which is the bigger facto…

I used to submit more years ago, but it got ridiculous to get votes. I suspect there must be a LOT of brigading to get posts out of the /newest cesspool.

I've looked closely at this data for years, and I don't think so. What there's a lot of is randomness.

It's of course possible that some people are clever enough that we don't even know what they're getting away with. But I can tell you that HN's anti-voting-ring software catches a great many cases. So many, in fact, that we'll often go through that list and remove the penalty on particularly good submissions, because sometimes people were clueless about trying to promote otherwise good content.

Edit: the other thing is that we regularly get independent confirmations that the anti-voting-ring software works...so at least it's not totally off.

Re: 1% rule

#142

Post by dang »

sixothree wrote: post #136
alecco wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to submit more years ago, but it got ridiculous to get votes. I suspect there must be a LOT of brigading to get posts out of the /newest cesspool.

I have posted three Healthcare IT related posts, none of which received more than 2 points. So yeah. I'm done.

I took a look and saw two:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20422094

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18363410

Those are both a bit too bureaucratic to be what the HN community finds intellectually interesting. There are a lot of submissions like this, often from trade journals, and they rarely do well because they lack motivation for a non-specialist audience to find them interesting. Usually there needs to be something tasty to entice the reader in, some hope of curiosity being satisfied. You can sometimes help with that by posting an initial comment in the thread explaining why you personally found an article interesting, especially if there's something non-obvious about it.

Re: 1% rule

#143

Post by dang »

test1235 wrote: post #124
alecco wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to submit more years ago, but it got ridiculous to get votes. I suspect there must be a LOT of brigading to get posts out of the /newest cesspool.

The internet feels very hostile nowadays - it seems like there's no end of people ready to take any comment out of context, and misconstrue to start an argument.

HN's guidelines are designed to dampen that. Example: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."

Of course the existence of guidelines does not imply the existence of guideline-following.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: 1% rule

#144

Post by dang »

W__S wrote: post #138
dang wrote: post #23

I once ran the numbers for HN and was surprised at how closely they matched this rule. Maybe I'll do it again. Edit: here are some estimates. We don't track enough to know about distinct users, so all we can do is guess. The number of accounts that have posted to HN this year, divided by the number of IP addresses that have accessed HN, is 0.008. How close that is to the '1% rule' depends on which is the bigger facto…

Maybe this will echo out into the empty universe, but I thought I would mention a point that I think skews your data and conclusion. My hypothesis is that the reason you are seeing what seems to confirm the stated rule, is that it is the "1%" (edit: it is likely actually some subsection of the 1%) that controls access and creates immense barriers and a hostile environment for participation. I theorize too that the re…

You could make the opposite argument by picking the other number (8%), which would be a very high rate. So the independent variable here is how you choose to see it.

The other problem is that if the 1% Rule has any validity, then this is true of the internet in general, so you can't really meaningfully single out HN. I agree that finding communities that deviate from the rule would be interesting, if they weren't super small. (Super small communities are interesting for other reasons.)

By the way, if you saw the number of times we email people out of the blue about their HN submissions, offering them help with making them more interesting to the community, or simply letting them know that we were re-upping their post (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11662380), you might feel a bit less like this place is corrupt and so on. Optimizing for curiosity is the way we try to manage HN. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

Re: 1% rule

#145

Post by dang »

Fnoord wrote: post #133
dang wrote: post #23

I once ran the numbers for HN and was surprised at how closely they matched this rule. Maybe I'll do it again. Edit: here are some estimates. We don't track enough to know about distinct users, so all we can do is guess. The number of accounts that have posted to HN this year, divided by the number of IP addresses that have accessed HN, is 0.008. How close that is to the '1% rule' depends on which is the bigger facto…

FWIW, I'm not logged in on every device. For example generally I'm not logged in on my mobile because I don't like typing on it. On a work computer I'm not logged in either. Though I don't know how widespread such usage is.

Very. In the numbers above, 76% of page views are from users not logged in.

I was surprised it wasn't even higher, since I remember it as having been 95% in some past analysis. This is more likely because I measured it differently than because something massively changed.

Re: 1% rule

#146

Post by dang »

Robin_Message wrote: post #121
dang wrote: post #23

I once ran the numbers for HN and was surprised at how closely they matched this rule. Maybe I'll do it again. Edit: here are some estimates. We don't track enough to know about distinct users, so all we can do is guess. The number of accounts that have posted to HN this year, divided by the number of IP addresses that have accessed HN, is 0.008. How close that is to the '1% rule' depends on which is the bigger facto…

It seems like 8% is an overestimate because logged in users are more likely to be engaged and so to have more page views than a casual user. Any way to divide logged in weekly sessions by all weekly sessions, or something like that?

How would you define "session"?

Re: 1% rule

#147

Post by abyssin »

dredmorbius wrote: post #94
nyfresh wrote: post #62

Long time lurker here.I often feel I have nothing useful to contribute.So I don't. You're welcome.

What I discovered, decades ago, was that posting questions, or even better, answers, even wrong ones (unintentionally) is a phenomenal way to learn things. That still holds true. Though it helps profoundly to not insist on being wrong. Which I try to do. Not always successfully.

I once posted a honest question and I have to say I felt chilled by the downvotes. I'd have expected votes to reflect a more constructive attitude.

Re: 1% rule

#148

Post by cxr »

koheripbal wrote: post #123
hyperman1 wrote: post #104

Same goes for bugs. 90 pct of your users doesn't even report downtime. A report on something non major is rare. I learned to listen to reported problems carefully, however weird.

Depends on the user. Some report every blip in their wifi.

Previously: They Might Never Tell You It's Broken

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21427996

Re: 1% rule

#149

Post by dredmorbius »

abyssin wrote: post #147
dredmorbius wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I discovered, decades ago, was that posting questions, or even better, answers, even wrong ones (unintentionally) is a phenomenal way to learn things. That still holds true. Though it helps profoundly to not insist on being wrong. Which I try to do. Not always successfully.

I once posted a honest question and I have to say I felt chilled by the downvotes. I'd have expected votes to reflect a more constructive attitude.

I consider myself something of an HN contrarian.

There are some downvotes, though on balance I've been better received than I'd expected.

Sometimes researching on your own to indicate you've attempted clarification, helps. "Did you mean / are you referring to X? ..."

Re: 1% rule

#150

Post by gigama »

alecco wrote: post #105
dang wrote: post #23

I once ran the numbers for HN and was surprised at how closely they matched this rule. Maybe I'll do it again. Edit: here are some estimates. We don't track enough to know about distinct users, so all we can do is guess. The number of accounts that have posted to HN this year, divided by the number of IP addresses that have accessed HN, is 0.008. How close that is to the '1% rule' depends on which is the bigger facto…

I used to submit more years ago, but it got ridiculous to get votes. I suspect there must be a LOT of brigading to get posts out of the /newest cesspool.

I just try to post things I find interesting and that maybe others would too. And not worry about votes... mainly because as "dang" indicates (in comments above) most hn readers aren't logged in and therefore aren't voting anyway.

Never heard the term "brigading" before... but yeah I see that behavior elsewhere a lot... the regulars who echo-chamber each other.

People who choose to spend their time doing that are, I think, just wasting their time. Since I am skeptical by default a cacophony of voices doesn't convince me of anything other than there's a mob afoot.

Share what you find interesting and let the curiosity and comments fall where they may.

Post reply on HN