You would find valuable (IMHO) Paul Graham's lessons from his experiences moderating HN: http://www.paulgraham.com/hackernews.html http://www.paulgraham.com/h

You would find valuable (IMHO) Paul Graham's lessons from his experiences moderating HN: http://www.paulgraham.com/hackernews.html http://www.paulgraham.com/hackernews.html My opinion (copied from another post I made awhile ago): I happily would accept unfairness, and suffer its slings and arrows myself, for a higher signal-to-noise ratio. I'd happily lose a few good comments in return for of better quality overall (i.e., false-positives are not really a big deal - so what if my good comment occasionally gets voted down or otherwise buried). By prioritizing quality over fairness HN can best distinguish itself from a million noise-filled alternatives where 'rights' [or democracy] are the priority. Everyone has a right to their opinions, but not to my time.