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

The downfall of Quora (2013)

thegoodones.quora.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 123 posts

Re: The downfall of Quora (2013)

#31

Post by aroch »

pinaceae wrote: post #27
Karunamon wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the sexism really necessary?

how is that sexism - look at the stats behind who edits wikipedia, who posts here or at quora. prove me wrong, with science. it is the opposite of sexism - it is an uncomfortable truth.

It isn't `mansplaining` just because a man is writing something. I also wasn't aware that writing source-backed articles for an encyclopedia is actually a secret plan by men to oppress women. If you're of the opinion that any time men write or speak on a subject that they're `mansplaining`, perhaps you should reevaluate your world view.

Re: The downfall of Quora (2013)

#32

Post by iamben »

Some of the comments here are really interesting. A lot of general Quora negativity?

I think the weekly (semi personalised?) Quora 'digest' is one of the only bacn emails I'll open pretty much without fail, almost always ending up on the site. Some of the questions/answers are fascinating.

Re: The downfall of Quora (2013)

#34

Post by DanBC »

Karunamon wrote: post #2

This struck me as more representative of other sites. Like, the one we're on now: The No Humor Rule: Humor is a de facto taboo on Quora. While the occasional demonstration of witwill evoke no more than a scowl and shake of the head from the community, more regular use will draw a barrage of down votes and risk the possibility of banishment. The staff attempts to deny that this istrue but fails to convince anyone. Man…

Most "funny" comments are just not funny. Comments that don't add anything to the conversation should[1] be downvoted. Funny comments that are funny tend to get upvotes. Humour is harder than spouting movie quotes or similar meme-based stuff.

[1] downvoting on HN is currently perplexing. Easiest way to get downvotes is to make a post with a clear but simple factual error - something easily fixed with a comment and an edit. In another thread someone was told to "go and die" and that comment is still live after an hour or so.

Re: The downfall of Quora (2013)

#35

Post by junto »

Quota. ?share=whatever

That to me sums up the site in its entirety. A content SEO Google cheater that tries to con people into signing up to boost its user numbers

They should have looked to StackOverflow as a good example of how you build a proper community, and more importantly, nurture it.

Good ridance.

Re: The downfall of Quora (2013)

#36

Post by simias »

Karunamon wrote: post #2

This struck me as more representative of other sites. Like, the one we're on now: The No Humor Rule: Humor is a de facto taboo on Quora. While the occasional demonstration of witwill evoke no more than a scowl and shake of the head from the community, more regular use will draw a barrage of down votes and risk the possibility of banishment. The staff attempts to deny that this istrue but fails to convince anyone. Man…

I agree with some of the points the author makes (although I've never contributed to quora myself) but I think he's misguided there.

In my opinion the problem with humour is not that it can be misunderstood by international readers, it's that it's very hard to find the sweet spot where the comment threads turn into a competition to find the wittiest/stupidest joke/pun on the article being discussed.

I think the issue is that most jokes don't really contribute to the discussion and unlike slashdot you can't motivate your vote (+5 funny vs. +5 insightful). There's also the problem that humour is hard to judge objectively and is likely to annoy as many users as it amuses.

That being said, if you make a very skillful, spiritual and/or topical joke on HN you might be upvoted, I've seen it happen in the past (with things like poems, lyrics and other "not-so-serious" content).

Also, of all the points the author makes, this one is the only one IMO that's really applicable to HN so I don't think it's possible to draw a parallel between Quora and HN (if that's what you were trying to do).

Re: The downfall of Quora (2013)

#37

Post by pinaceae »

aroch wrote: post #31
pinaceae wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how is that sexism - look at the stats behind who edits wikipedia, who posts here or at quora. prove me wrong, with science. it is the opposite of sexism - it is an uncomfortable truth.

It isn't `mansplaining` just because a man is writing something. I also wasn't aware that writing source-backed articles for an encyclopedia is actually a secret plan by men to oppress women. If you're of the opinion that any time men write or speak on a subject that they're `mansplaining`, perhaps you should reevaluate your world view.

this is not about oppressing women, wtf.

this is about sites using the natural trait of men, especially the nerdy types, to get immense joy of being right. not being able to have something stand uncorrected. and to assume all others are idiots and uninformed. which is where the gender angle comes into play, imho by accident.

you don't need to pay them, they'll do all the work, just let them be right, publicly.

Re: The downfall of Quora (2013)

#38

Post by 001sky »

DanBC wrote: post #14

A surprising fierce critique of quora. I'm not sure there's anything someone wanting to build a community can learn from this article. Which is a shame, because we should really be trying to learn from experience. It would counter the fuckin stupid ideas some people have. (ie: real names only to combat hostility and trolling. The obvious counter would be the comment sections of most newspapers.)

The only pessimism warranted is that people can't differentiate experimentalism from failure. Empirical data on failure is under-valued. Just like how academics never publish all the shit that goes wrong. Tons could be learned/saved from publishing negative results. After all, its all in the interpreation. Having bad empirical examples heightens contrast and differentiation, which is often a good thing.

Re: The downfall of Quora (2013)

#39

Post by malka »

aroch wrote: post #31
pinaceae wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how is that sexism - look at the stats behind who edits wikipedia, who posts here or at quora. prove me wrong, with science. it is the opposite of sexism - it is an uncomfortable truth.

It isn't `mansplaining` just because a man is writing something. I also wasn't aware that writing source-backed articles for an encyclopedia is actually a secret plan by men to oppress women. If you're of the opinion that any time men write or speak on a subject that they're `mansplaining`, perhaps you should reevaluate your world view.

Imo, his/her point would be closer to 'men enjoy to show off and brag more than women do'. Though the word 'mansplaining' was poorly chosen imo

Re: The downfall of Quora (2013)

#40

Post by parkov »

iamben wrote: post #32

Some of the comments here are really interesting. A lot of general Quora negativity? I think the weekly (semi personalised?) Quora 'digest' is one of the only bacn emails I'll open pretty much without fail, almost always ending up on the site. Some of the questions/answers are fascinating.

I also enjoyed the Quora digests until one day the links stopped going directly to the threads but all pointed to a feed page. I assumed this was another dark pattern to boost pageviews and unsubscribed.
Post reply on HN