3 ms·

> This is a concept people use all the time in everyday life without provoking ontological crises. +1 for common sense; however: > This is why forums are such

> This is a concept people use all the time in everyday life without provoking ontological crises. +1 for common sense; however: > This is why forums are such a time sink. I doubt that you can realize the benefits of an open forum without paying what we might call the free speech tax - the inevitable disruptions of pedantry and/or trolling, which under the right circumstances are insightful and even revelatory.

projectileboy 17y ago
Sadly, you're probably right. What's depressing is that HN wasn't like that for a very long time (2 or 3 years, maybe?), but it seems to be descending into a Reddit-like cesspool of crazy very rapidly. Having said that, this is still by far the best non-trivial online community that I know of. EDIT: Wow... downvoted in 4 minutes, for a mostly harmless comment. I guess we've become closer to Reddit than I thought. I normally hate elitist groups, but there's a part of me that would like to see every account newer than, say, 200 days just get nuked. <sigh>... I really loved this site.
- RyanMcGreal 17y ago
  Please note that I'm not saying HN is turning into reddit - I don't believe my score is high enough for me to be allowed to make that claim. (I do believe HN would benefit from a measure of reddit-style levity: right now it's all Serious Business, all the time.) What I'm saying is that real constructive critical debate requires strong-willed, pedantic, even curmudgeonly debaters. The marketplace of ideas doesn't work without the push and pull of challenges, refutations and even meta-refutations ('You're asking the wrong question'). If Paul Graham wants good answers to his question, the price he has to pay is an allotment of bad answers - answers that are revealed as such on the marketplace of ideas. You can't get the good stuff without also allowing the bad stuff (and having reasonable filters to distinguish them). P.S. Not sure why I was downvoted for my comment above.

projectileboy 17y ago

Sadly, you're probably right. What's depressing is that HN wasn't like that for a very long time (2 or 3 years, maybe?), but it seems to be descending into a Reddit-like cesspool of crazy very rapidly. Having said that, this is still by far the best non-trivial online community that I know of. EDIT: Wow... downvoted in 4 minutes, for a mostly harmless comment. I guess we've become closer to Reddit than I thought. I normally hate elitist groups, but there's a part of me that would like to see every account newer than, say, 200 days just get nuked. <sigh>... I really loved this site.

RyanMcGreal 17y ago
Please note that I'm not saying HN is turning into reddit - I don't believe my score is high enough for me to be allowed to make that claim. (I do believe HN would benefit from a measure of reddit-style levity: right now it's all Serious Business, all the time.) What I'm saying is that real constructive critical debate requires strong-willed, pedantic, even curmudgeonly debaters. The marketplace of ideas doesn't work without the push and pull of challenges, refutations and even meta-refutations ('You're asking the wrong question'). If Paul Graham wants good answers to his question, the price he has to pay is an allotment of bad answers - answers that are revealed as such on the marketplace of ideas. You can't get the good stuff without also allowing the bad stuff (and having reasonable filters to distinguish them). P.S. Not sure why I was downvoted for my comment above.