We tracked 605 Show HN posts for 63 days
1–10 of 16 posts
Re: We tracked 605 Show HN posts for 63 days
#2Like all content on social media, what am I supposed to find interesting here?
Re: We tracked 605 Show HN posts for 63 days
#3This seems to have a fundamental misunderstanding of Hacker News's front page. The goal is to have posts only show up for at most a day or two. I would expect 100% to be gone in a week.
The "outliers" are posts that were deleted and re-submitted, or possibly boosted by the moderators. The "visible for 44 days" post was only submitted 14 days ago; either it was deleted or it is a glitch in this guy's script.
Re: We tracked 605 Show HN posts for 63 days
#4This seems to have a fundamental misunderstanding of Hacker News's front page. The goal is to have posts only show up for at most a day or two. I would expect 100% to be gone in a week. The "outliers" are posts that were deleted and re-submitted, or possibly boosted by the moderators. The "visible for 44 days" post was only submitted 14 days ago; either it was deleted or it is a glitch in this guy's script.
Fair point — and you're partially right.
The "44 days" outlier (Grov) appeared in our snapshots on 12 unique dates spread across 47 calendar days, not continuously. Our methodology measured time between first and last appearance in the top 50, which collapses resubmissions into one window. That's a real limitation we should have flagged.
The raw data: Grov first appeared Dec 8, then clusters on Dec 17-22, Dec 29, and Jan 16-24. Big gaps in between. It wasn't sitting on the front page for 44 days straight — it kept reappearing.
We're updating the study to add a "continuous visibility" metric alongside the existing one. The core finding still holds (99% of Show HNs are gone within days, and the median post gets a single 30-min window), but the outlier framing was misleading.
Appreciate the pushback.
Re: We tracked 605 Show HN posts for 63 days
#5Like all content on social media, what am I supposed to find interesting here?
Beyond the headline, the author provides information for people interested in increasing the longevity of their "Show HN" post.
Sections 4-6 have actionable insights:
* Part 4: The 1% — Who Survived and Why
* Part 5: When to Post
* Part 6: What This Means for Builders
But I agree, the headline doesn't convey that those insights are within the article.
Re: We tracked 605 Show HN posts for 63 days
#6I thought the products or services advertised were gone in a week. This is substantially less interesting.
Re: We tracked 605 Show HN posts for 63 days
#7Like all content on social media, what am I supposed to find interesting here?
Beyond the headline, the author provides information for people interested in increasing the longevity of their "Show HN" post. Sections 4-6 have actionable insights: * Part 4: The 1% — Who Survived and Why * Part 5: When to Post * Part 6: What This Means for Builders But I agree, the headline doesn't convey that those insights are within the article.
Not sure that holds up anymore 5 years later and with the increase in popularity oh HN
Re: We tracked 605 Show HN posts for 63 days
#8This seems to have a fundamental misunderstanding of Hacker News's front page. The goal is to have posts only show up for at most a day or two. I would expect 100% to be gone in a week. The "outliers" are posts that were deleted and re-submitted, or possibly boosted by the moderators. The "visible for 44 days" post was only submitted 14 days ago; either it was deleted or it is a glitch in this guy's script.
Fair point — and you're partially right. The "44 days" outlier (Grov) appeared in our snapshots on 12 unique dates spread across 47 calendar days, not continuously. Our methodology measured time between first and last appearance in the top 50, which collapses resubmissions into one window. That's a real limitation we should have flagged. The raw data: Grov first appeared Dec 8, then clusters on Dec 17-22, Dec 29, and…
Oh, hi chatgpt
Re: We tracked 605 Show HN posts for 63 days
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
Beyond the headline, the author provides information for people interested in increasing the longevity of their "Show HN" post. Sections 4-6 have actionable insights: * Part 4: The 1% — Who Survived and Why * Part 5: When to Post * Part 6: What This Means for Builders But I agree, the headline doesn't convey that those insights are within the article.
Not sure that holds up anymore 5 years later and with the increase in popularity oh HN
1. Not sure what holds up anymore?
2. What do you mean 5 years later? The article was posted today and the data was collected between December 2025 and February 2026.
Re: We tracked 605 Show HN posts for 63 days
#10This seems to have a fundamental misunderstanding of Hacker News's front page. The goal is to have posts only show up for at most a day or two. I would expect 100% to be gone in a week. The "outliers" are posts that were deleted and re-submitted, or possibly boosted by the moderators. The "visible for 44 days" post was only submitted 14 days ago; either it was deleted or it is a glitch in this guy's script.
For the "14 days ago" one - post timestamps get updated when a post gets re-submitted or boosted by the moderators. It would have actually been there from 44 days ago even if it's now saying it was more recent.