11–20 of 111 posts
This seems like a relevant venue to mention my startup http://www.sagebump.com/?view=technocrat&info which dampens HN flagging, re-ranks and merges the top submissions along with those from other tech sites. Thought it might be of interest to those fielding similar complaints. Please note: sageBump is not a replacement, it is a tool for HN
should add 2010 to the title.
Have anything changed since then?
I had a conversation thread go 7 levels deep talking about my point and I got 4 down votes!
1. Lack of down-vote means vocal minorities are
disproportionately represented.
2. Votes on comments are used to express agreement
or disagreement rather than value, perhaps because
many people simply cannot see the difference
between the two.
3. The community is full of ideologues to the point
where the comments are most often just predictable
talking points being regurgitated ad nauseum.
4. The community is often snobbish and out of touch
with how the other half lives.
5. It's a time suck.
6. It removes comments from where they should be,
on the destination site.
7. It reduces blogging time.
Disclaimer: I'm a devotee of HN; It's home, but also I'm a devotee of critical thinking.
"Intellectuals have nuanced conversations about any topic."
Just think about this sentence for a second. Especially the "nuanced" part in the context of this statement. And then go a little further and think about all the radical, fundamentalist movements that time and time again attract intellectuals.
Basically what imo is consistently being criticized about like HN is normal human behavior. Without it, there is no community, only cold factual discourse that attracts no-one, at least not for very long. Not even so-called "intellectuals". You can have a debate based on those criteria, but not a lively 24/7 community.
The ideal format may be to have a community and a debate forum side by side, with the latter being strictly moderated and low volume. Reddit kind of works that way, with it's subreddits.
Maybe HN could use the same, not in the free-for-all format of Reddit, but a different form of more narrowly focused, strictly moderated sub-forums which integrate seamlessly with the core platform.
Matt's reasons: 1. Lack of down-vote means vocal minorities are disproportionately represented. 2. Votes on comments are used to express agreement or disagreement rather than value, perhaps because many people simply cannot see the difference between the two. 3. The community is full of ideologues to the point where the comments are most often just predictable talking points being regurgitated ad nauseum. 4. The comm…
Does that mean that we better down-vote whenever we see a comment does not add value to the topic?
I guess the tl;dr is that community churn is healthy, expected. Leaving essays may be of limited use depending on how many axes to author has to grind or how generally-applicable their comments are to the rest of the community.
This seems like a relevant venue to mention my startup http://www.sagebump.com/?view=technocrat&info which dampens HN flagging, re-ranks and merges the top submissions along with those from other tech sites. Thought it might be of interest to those fielding similar complaints. Please note: sageBump is not a replacement, it is a tool for HN
This seems like a relevant venue to mention my startup http://www.sagebump.com/?view=technocrat&info which dampens HN flagging, re-ranks and merges the top submissions along with those from other tech sites. Thought it might be of interest to those fielding similar complaints. Please note: sageBump is not a replacement, it is a tool for HN
Visited to check it out - can't get rid of the bloody great slab that overlays the actual content, clicked in lots of places, closed.