A Liar Standing Next to a Hole in the Ground: Gold Mining in Arizona
outsideonline.com
A Liar Standing Next to a Hole in the Ground: Gold Mining in Arizona
1–10 of 14 posts
Re: A Liar Standing Next to a Hole in the Ground: Gold Mining in Arizona
#2You liked the article so much you decided to submit it twice?
I read it after yesterday's link. I concluded that I really don't understand the urge to prospect for gold, at least not in the secret mines, ancient tales, and schlepping ore by pack and pack animal sort of way.
Re: A Liar Standing Next to a Hole in the Ground: Gold Mining in Arizona
#3You liked the article so much you decided to submit it twice? I read it after yesterday's link. I concluded that I really don't understand the urge to prospect for gold, at least not in the secret mines, ancient tales, and schlepping ore by pack and pack animal sort of way.
> You liked the article so much you decided to submit it twice?
No, that was us. We asked the submitter to repost it as part of an ongoing experiment we're running to give good stories multiple chances at the front page. I wrote about this here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8790134.
Re: A Liar Standing Next to a Hole in the Ground: Gold Mining in Arizona
#4You liked the article so much you decided to submit it twice? I read it after yesterday's link. I concluded that I really don't understand the urge to prospect for gold, at least not in the secret mines, ancient tales, and schlepping ore by pack and pack animal sort of way.
> You liked the article so much you decided to submit it twice? No, that was us. We asked the submitter to repost it as part of an ongoing experiment we're running to give good stories multiple chances at the front page. I wrote about this here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8790134 .
The account submitted 9 links, including to high-quality print magazines (Outside Magazine, The Atlantic, Rolling Stone) within an hour. I wondered if the submitter had not remembered which had already been posted.
Rhetorically speaking, how do I distinguish between someone who was asked to re-post, and someone who is making multiple submissions for, say, self-promotional reason? This case didn't look like self-promotion, though others with a sparser posting history might. I tend to flag the more egregious self-promoters.
After reading your comments, I'll be more generous about upvoting /newest.
Re: A Liar Standing Next to a Hole in the Ground: Gold Mining in Arizona
#5You liked the article so much you decided to submit it twice? I read it after yesterday's link. I concluded that I really don't understand the urge to prospect for gold, at least not in the secret mines, ancient tales, and schlepping ore by pack and pack animal sort of way.
> You liked the article so much you decided to submit it twice? No, that was us. We asked the submitter to repost it as part of an ongoing experiment we're running to give good stories multiple chances at the front page. I wrote about this here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8790134 .
I like this idea, but if you decide to go ahead and make it a regular thing you should indicate that it's a repost somehow, or maybe have an "Editors Pick" tab with the chosen stories.
Re: A Liar Standing Next to a Hole in the Ground: Gold Mining in Arizona
#6Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You liked the article so much you decided to submit it twice? No, that was us. We asked the submitter to repost it as part of an ongoing experiment we're running to give good stories multiple chances at the front page. I wrote about this here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8790134 .
I like this idea, but if you decide to go ahead and make it a regular thing you should indicate that it's a repost somehow, or maybe have an "Editors Pick" tab with the chosen stories.
We've bounced the first idea around for a while but I am loth to disrupt the look of the front page. Your second suggestion, though, sounds like it might solve the problem. Thanks!
I'd like to emphasize that our long-term intention is to have the community manage all of this.
Re: A Liar Standing Next to a Hole in the Ground: Gold Mining in Arizona
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You liked the article so much you decided to submit it twice? No, that was us. We asked the submitter to repost it as part of an ongoing experiment we're running to give good stories multiple chances at the front page. I wrote about this here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8790134 .
The account submitted 9 links, including to high-quality print magazines (Outside Magazine, The Atlantic, Rolling Stone) within an hour. I wondered if the submitter had not remembered which had already been posted. Rhetorically speaking, how do I distinguish between someone who was asked to re-post, and someone who is making multiple submissions for, say, self-promotional reason? This case didn't look like self-promo…
> how do I distinguish between someone who was asked to re-post, and someone who is making multiple submissions for, say, self-promotional reason?
For the time being, you have to tell that by looking at the articles and the account's submission history. It's usually pretty easy to spot self-promotion. Keep in mind, though, that self-promotion per se isn't against the spirit of the site; uninteresting content is.
Also, we modified the FAQ to make it clear that when a story hasn't had much attention yet, a small number of reposts is ok. The point of all of this is try to mitigate the weaknesses of /newest as a mechanism for recognizing good stories.
Re: A Liar Standing Next to a Hole in the Ground: Gold Mining in Arizona
#8He doesn't hire horses suitable for labour, blames them for getting tangled while also boasting of his cowboy experience, and complains bitterly of the risk that he might have to spend time tending to them if they get injured. This guy is an asshole. I hope he chokes on his gold.
Re: A Liar Standing Next to a Hole in the Ground: Gold Mining in Arizona
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You liked the article so much you decided to submit it twice? No, that was us. We asked the submitter to repost it as part of an ongoing experiment we're running to give good stories multiple chances at the front page. I wrote about this here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8790134 .
The account submitted 9 links, including to high-quality print magazines (Outside Magazine, The Atlantic, Rolling Stone) within an hour. I wondered if the submitter had not remembered which had already been posted. Rhetorically speaking, how do I distinguish between someone who was asked to re-post, and someone who is making multiple submissions for, say, self-promotional reason? This case didn't look like self-promo…
> Rhetorically speaking, how do I distinguish between someone who was asked to re-post, and someone who is making multiple submissions for, say, self-promotional reason?
Not trying to be crass, but why would we care? I upvote interesting content, and ignore uninteresting content.
Is there a reason that we should be concerned whether the submitter is benefitting in some way from his submission?
Re: A Liar Standing Next to a Hole in the Ground: Gold Mining in Arizona
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
The account submitted 9 links, including to high-quality print magazines (Outside Magazine, The Atlantic, Rolling Stone) within an hour. I wondered if the submitter had not remembered which had already been posted. Rhetorically speaking, how do I distinguish between someone who was asked to re-post, and someone who is making multiple submissions for, say, self-promotional reason? This case didn't look like self-promo…
> how do I distinguish between someone who was asked to re-post, and someone who is making multiple submissions for, say, self-promotional reason? For the time being, you have to tell that by looking at the articles and the account's submission history. It's usually pretty easy to spot self-promotion. Keep in mind, though, that self-promotion per se isn't against the spirit of the site; uninteresting content is. Also…
you could have a feature on the front page that takes 3 stories from the new feed an displays them at the bottom of the front page for users that are above some "wisdom karma threshold" similar to the downvote threshold. if you want to provide some checks and balances to the 3 stories you could include one that is flagkilled but is not distinguished as such to the user and see what the user does with that story.
You can also have stories with more text behind them as an indicator of quality. While long stories could be gamed, I think it's a decently helpful metric of quality as most spammers are lazy enough not to write a long article. not a perfect metric but something to consider.