3 ms·
I don't agree with this sentiment. I've seen having a "consistent identity" get in the way of a discussion for a variety of reasons: - Ad hominem attacks - Di
by Cpoll 10y ago
I don't agree with this sentiment. I've seen having a "consistent identity" get in the way of a discussion for a variety of reasons:
- Ad hominem attacks
- Disclosing hypocrisy (as a logical fallacy)
- Celebrity posters distracting from the subject
- Appeals to authority
Consistent identity is a no-brainer within the context of a single post; beyond that, there are downsides.
- dang 10y agoYes, if you list only the downsides it sounds like a bad idea.
- Cpoll 10y agoYou already listed the upsides. I'm taking the opposite stance, of course I'll list downsides. In any case, HN doesn't feel like it has an individual-driven community, at least compared to Reddit. I'm hard pressed to name any users on this site. That might be more a reflection on me - I come here to read about interesting topics, and I have more interest in the message than the speaker. Incidentally, how many HN users can you name? (I'm genuinely curious)
- dang 10y agoI didn't list all the upsides, just the executive summary :) But for sure there are multiple legitimate views about how best to set up an internet forum. Nevertheless HN is set up the way I described and we're not going to change it. Re names: No idea, but more than it would be worth taking the time to try listing. I'm the wrong person to ask, though, since it's my job to monitor HN.