81–90 of 193 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm guessing high, comments suggest involvement in the community.
Yes high submissions with no or low involvement in the community. Either they really, really, really, really love submission karma or they're here to exploit the site.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're right but because it's logarithmic, the difference is nominal and evaporates as a new member makes more posts. Plus, what is the downside to encouraging new members to post?
Because newer members not familiar with the guidelines typically post the more inflammatory comments that we have seen as of late.
Also, to state the obvious, every member here was a new member at one time and I'm not ready to say that is "typical" behavior. It's just very memorable behavior.
The whole reason why I submitted this was because PG said it wasn't the comments that cause issues but that bad comments were getting upvoted too much.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fuck average karma. Who even looks at it (besides the owner of the karma)? I post a relatively high volume of comments on articles that get little visibility. Sometimes I answer an Ask HN type question with what ( I thik) is a good/useful answer and don't even get an up vote from the asker (but I have gotten 'thanks!' replies). Oh well, I come here to discover new things and try and return knowledge I've contributed…
I guess some people hope, that high Karma will improve their chances when they apply to Y Combinator. Actually, I vaguely remember a post or essay from pg, which suggested that one of the reasons to create HN was to assess potentially good founders based on the content they post on HN. I'm not saying YC is actually skimming applications based on user Karma. But even if they don't, people might believe it.
High karma does not make up for an application that does not resonate with the reviewers.
Reward users for browsing "New" This is an interesting suggestion. I think of looking at new submissions as a kind of "service to the community"-- more specifically, to the community I want HN to be. If the front page is filled with links I don't value, then it's partly my fault if I've failed to upvote submissions I would rather see on the front page (this, of course, means browsing "new" is a reward unto itself, bu…
Fuck average karma. Who even looks at it (besides the owner of the karma)? I post a relatively high volume of comments on articles that get little visibility. Sometimes I answer an Ask HN type question with what ( I thik) is a good/useful answer and don't even get an up vote from the asker (but I have gotten 'thanks!' replies). Oh well, I come here to discover new things and try and return knowledge I've contributed…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm guessing high, comments suggest involvement in the community.
Yes high submissions with no or low involvement in the community. Either they really, really, really, really love submission karma or they're here to exploit the site.
This, and many of the suggestions in the original thread, and pg's default response, are all falling into the same trap: they are attempting to fix a people problem using technical solutions. Technology can make community management easier. Better algorithms and visual design and so on can improve the way that a community polices itself. But, I think eventually you'll run into vanishing returns from that kind of stuf…
"What doesn't matter" ... "Complaints of 'too much startups, not enough tech' or vice-versa" Is there a place to go for real hacking articles and none of the startup news bullshit? I don't care if it's called Hacker News or not. I don't even care if it's /new/. I just want a place to discuss interesting articles about making software and hardware do interesting things.
Regardless, what you are describing would be much appreciated.
I'm an algorithm designer, so I don't know about all of these changes but I do have a mathematical solution to PG's vote value problem: before edit: Value of vote = Log[base:TotalUserKarma](UserAvgKarmaPerComment) after edit: Vote Value = (Log[base:TotalUserKarma](AvgUserKarma)) * (Log[base:(25)](ThreadTop50Rank)) another edit: Vote Value = (Log[base:Median(AvgUserKarma)](AvgUserKarma)) * (Log[base:(25)](ThreadTop50R…
This proposal would give a relative penalty to people like me who get into lengthy discussions, and who reply in older threads. Whether or not this is a good thing is a matter of preference. (My preference should be obvious.) Though, truth be told, I've never worried much about karma.
For orthogonality's sake, I would suggest that if most of your posts come from 1:1 conversations, post by post, then perhaps there is a better medium to communicate with that person than through a board like HN.
This, and many of the suggestions in the original thread, and pg's default response, are all falling into the same trap: they are attempting to fix a people problem using technical solutions. Technology can make community management easier. Better algorithms and visual design and so on can improve the way that a community polices itself. But, I think eventually you'll run into vanishing returns from that kind of stuf…
The other thing is that his proposal was a proposal to "improve" Hacker News, not a promise to "fix" hacker news. Trying to do a grand massive "fix every problem" is more likely to introduce new problems than just making relatively safe improvements.
This, and many of the suggestions in the original thread, and pg's default response, are all falling into the same trap: they are attempting to fix a people problem using technical solutions. Technology can make community management easier. Better algorithms and visual design and so on can improve the way that a community polices itself. But, I think eventually you'll run into vanishing returns from that kind of stuf…
I don't think it's fair to call any of the post's suggestions purely "technical solutions". They all involve changing the user interface and that can make a dramatic difference in how an online community functions. (In contrast, pg's idea to assign different weights to comment votes would be invisible, leaving the site UI as is. That is a purely technical solution.)
I didn't mean to imply that technical solutions wouldn't make a difference, even dramatic ones, just that they could not completely take the place of some manual effort.