Live data from Hacker News

Poll: Should we ban TechCrunch?

news.ycombinator.com

21–30 of 141 posts

Re: Poll: Should we ban TechCrunch?

#21
post #10

Do you feel newbies are being misled? Isit not the case that older hands are sufficiently aware of TC's proclivities? Is it not enough simply to flag the contributions when they are clearly wrong, or down-mod stupid, irrelevant or content-free comments? What would banning them add? Is it impossible that they might yet say something useful?

You can't downvote submissions and TC is great at linkbait headlines, which get upvoted before people read the actual post. That's the problem.

This suggestion may seem a little odd, but how about only enabling the up arrow once the URL has been visited? (via that javascript visited link colour trick, perhaps) It won't stop deliberate thoughtless upvoting, but nothing will.

Re: Poll: Should we ban TechCrunch?

#22
Twitter is clearly getting more TC coverage than any other startup in existence...On top of that, TC covers random and uninmportant events such as a 104-year old woman using Twitter (followed by a denial), an astronaut using Twitter (followed by a denial), a cat using Twitter, Kanye West not being happy with Twitter, ad nauseam.

This happened with Facebook too and to some extent Youtube. In my opinion TC are doing the same as most of the media:

People join X social networking site

Media writes about X site

People feel positive with a "hey, they're talking about X, I use X. This publication/site is relevant to me" feeling

More people join X

Re: Poll: Should we ban TechCrunch?

#23
post #17
post #12

If you don't like TechCrunch, "ban" it for yourself, why do you need a collective approval for this? Sorry, I think HN does not deserve polls like this one.

In that case, why is valleywag banned? http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=160704 Collective screening of linkbait/spam articles is useful IMHO.

because it's banned, I just had this great nostalgic moment. "Remember when ValleyWag used to clog news.yc with crap?" Glad those days are behind us.

Re: Poll: Should we ban TechCrunch?

#24

My suggestion is to limit the number of stories that can be submitted and/or made popular in a day. So if one story makes it to the front page in the past 24 hours, news submissions from the same site are disabled. The time period can be manipulated (12 hours, one week, whatever). This will limit the effect of TC and a few other sites that are very frequent front-pagers without merit IMHO.

That seems rather random. What if there actually are two good articles from the same site within 24 hours?

Re: Poll: Should we ban TechCrunch?

#27
I see a lot of comments discussing the quality of TC's scurrilous writing. May I suggest you ignore that? TC itself is almost irrelevant to the question of banning. Even if it is false, linkbaiting dreck. Instead of considering the quality of the links, try looking at the quality of HN discussions about those links.

Do HN discussions add insight and interest? Do they raise or lower the quality of discourse here?

Some discussions devolve very quickly into name-calling, negativity, and mindlessness. Some elevate into insightful observations and positive debate. Look at the discussions and think about whether HN should encourage or discourage them.

My thought is that if TC discussions on HN are positive, there should be no ban regardless of the quality of the links. But if there is a preponderance of negative discussions around its links, it may be in HN's interests to simply walk away without any further ado.

Re: Poll: Should we ban TechCrunch?

#28
If I were less time-poor I would resume maitaining a set of Greasemonkey scripts to filter out Tech Crunch and the like from HN and aggregation/community sites I visit. However it would be nice if PG would whip up a user-specific "ignore-these-domains" field in the user prefs. (Just a text box for a comma-separated list would suffice.)

The thing that annoys me about TC is that their headlines are so inflammatory that I just have to click them to find out what they're beating up now, and always instantly regret it. Perhaps the key is developing better self-control.

Re: Poll: Should we ban TechCrunch?

#29
A ban would allow no incentive for them to change their behavior.

As it is, the up/down voting gives them feedback on an post-by-post basis as to what matters to HNers. [ Just in case they care. ]

In regard to one post: Let's not "protect" noobs from "bad info" - except to the extent that we noobs can see what the overall HN population thinks of value of specific articles. That is the power of what HN has to offer to begin with! --and it gives more feedback about specific articles (e.g., if there is no (or few) upvotes) than if no feedback at HN existed about particular posts.

Post reply on HN