3 ms·
just have a bunch of friends vote your stuff up....that's what most people do. Otherwise it's really a crap shoot on whether or not you'll make it to the front
by vaksel 17y ago
just have a bunch of friends vote your stuff up....that's what most people do. Otherwise it's really a crap shoot on whether or not you'll make it to the front page, unless you are submitting something that other people would try to submit(i.e. techcrunch articles)
- jokull 17y agoI don't have friends with HN accounts :(
- dotBen 17y agoThis kind of defeats the point of any of these peer driven vote sites if you can get your friends to vote stuff up (cos you asked, not on merit). Yes, yes, yes I know that is EXACTLY how it end up working on HN, Digg, Reddit and everywhere else. I'm just a crusty old purist.
- vaksel 17y agothe problem is that the entire life of a story depends on a 5 minute window during which you absolutely must get an upvote. A better window for a story's quality should be based on a # of views. i.e. at least one upvote in 100 views.
- _delirium 17y agoAs a purist of a different kind, I see it as more of a fundamental problem in the way HN/Digg/Reddit/etc. voting works, in that it's heavily sensitive to voting in the initial period, which is often pretty random, and then stuff that happens to get a few upvotes in that early period tends to snowball due to the feedback loop of being on the front page -> more people see it -> more people upvote. Apart from its slower speed (too few stories per day), I actually see the Slashdot model, warts at all, as somewhat superior; or the Kuro5hin model as a vote-driven alternative. How's that for crusty purism. ;-) I try to personally insulate myself from the fundamental brokenness by not using the HN front page, and only looking at the /newest page.