3 ms·

In some ways HN is designed to combat this. You need to "earn" downvotes with contributions, and the sites UX is designed in a way to slow down low effort comme

In some ways HN is designed to combat this. You need to "earn" downvotes with contributions, and the sites UX is designed in a way to slow down low effort comments, and to make comments sit for a bit before allowing replies (with workarounds if needed). The things that aren't features (like the lack of notifications) also help.

Grishnakh 10y ago
>In some ways HN is designed to combat this. Yeah, those things are an example of something that sounds great in theory, but doesn't work out in practice.
- eloisius 10y ago
  I wonder if recent UI enhancements really improve the discussion, or if they are just indicators that we've reached that critical threshold. I don't remember wanting for collapsable threads and such four or five years ago, but now I can't imagine sifting through all the junk without them.
  - Klathmon 10y ago
    Personally I really like that change because it helps keep one thread from derailing a whole submission. But I also feel like my karma goes up faster now too, but that could just be in my head.
    - mikeash 10y ago
      Certainly I'd be a lot more ashamed at having my rant at the top here if not for the ability to collapse it.
      - Klathmon 10y ago
        And there is an aspect to that ability that I know people don't like. The ability to collapse means you feel less bad about somewhat-off-topic conversation, which in a way can create worse discussion for the actual topic. But at the same time some of my favorite HN threads have been offshoots of the submission's topic.
- sctbpwn 10y ago
  Your shit is greyed out so I guess it's working pretty well.
dredmorbius 10y ago
There's also a quite-active, and largely effective, moderation effort by @dang and ... I forget the other mod, scbc or something like that. I've been making comparative studies of a few communities (HN, Reddit, G+, Imzy, Ello), and it's interesting to see how various ones work. In particular, there's a tremendous culture against the types of even indirect personal attacks at HN which fly in spades elsewhere. I saw @dang inveighing against a comment which began with "<sigh>", on the grounds that that is the equivalent of an internet eyeroll. On G+, discussion quality depends very much on the host and how they manage a particular thread. I've got problems with Google itself, but the platform can support quite good discussions. Overall participation has always been small (6-12 million users posting publicly per month, a value I'd had a hand in determining), but in corners, that's still a good crowd. The best circumstance is to cultivate a small group ~30-100 members or so, set firm expectations for participation, moderate aggressively (that is, promptly), though fairly and starting with social nudges. There's a balance between topic drift and derailment. Reddit varies hugely by subreddit, the good ones are exceptionally good. The site as a whole has some faults that leak through even to the good subs though. Ello has a very small (~10k or so daily, ~200k or so monthly visits) userbase, but it strikes me as quite well behaved for the most part, something I've commented on specifically to the site's admins. Imzy, the "kinder, gentler Reddit" has largely proven not to be. For reasons not entirely suprising when you combine an on-tap, ad libitum anonymity access, lacking leadership, overtaxed / AWOL moderation, exceptionally ill-conceived notifications, threading, and response mechanisms, and a community drawn from SRS and similar beds of vitriol. It's not the issues advocated for, but the methods of advocacy, including ample amounts of friendly fire and hypocrisy, which generate problems. I watched a trainwreck explode simply trying to discuss anonymity itself: https://ello.co/dredmorbius/post/qdxyzy2x4lbaq_4rx81nnw https://ello.co/dredmorbius/post/qdxyzy2x4lbaq_4rx81nnw
- Klathmon 10y ago
  I have tried most of them and feel largely the same. HN seems in that sweet spot for me where it is large enough to have a good amount of discussion but still has very good quality. Most "reddit but more free" sites turn into imzy or even worse voat. G+ communities are too small for me, and finding a good community is proving to be hard. And I've given up on reddit for any larger scale technical discussion (there's just too much vitriol and "my team is better" sentiment there. It always seems to focus on the negative, and creating a "positive only" subreddit seems like a bad idea, and it attracts the users that will fight that idea on principle) I'll need to try Ello though. Have you looked at lobsters? It's much smaller than HN but also more technical (and with its own share of bias against anything newer in my experience)

Grishnakh 10y ago

>In some ways HN is designed to combat this. Yeah, those things are an example of something that sounds great in theory, but doesn't work out in practice.

eloisius 10y ago
I wonder if recent UI enhancements really improve the discussion, or if they are just indicators that we've reached that critical threshold. I don't remember wanting for collapsable threads and such four or five years ago, but now I can't imagine sifting through all the junk without them.
- Klathmon 10y ago
  Personally I really like that change because it helps keep one thread from derailing a whole submission. But I also feel like my karma goes up faster now too, but that could just be in my head.
  - mikeash 10y ago
    Certainly I'd be a lot more ashamed at having my rant at the top here if not for the ability to collapse it.
    - Klathmon 10y ago
      And there is an aspect to that ability that I know people don't like. The ability to collapse means you feel less bad about somewhat-off-topic conversation, which in a way can create worse discussion for the actual topic. But at the same time some of my favorite HN threads have been offshoots of the submission's topic.
sctbpwn 10y ago
Your shit is greyed out so I guess it's working pretty well.

dredmorbius 10y ago

There's also a quite-active, and largely effective, moderation effort by @dang and ... I forget the other mod, scbc or something like that. I've been making comparative studies of a few communities (HN, Reddit, G+, Imzy, Ello), and it's interesting to see how various ones work. In particular, there's a tremendous culture against the types of even indirect personal attacks at HN which fly in spades elsewhere. I saw @dang inveighing against a comment which began with "<sigh>", on the grounds that that is the equivalent of an internet eyeroll. On G+, discussion quality depends very much on the host and how they manage a particular thread. I've got problems with Google itself, but the platform can support quite good discussions. Overall participation has always been small (6-12 million users posting publicly per month, a value I'd had a hand in determining), but in corners, that's still a good crowd. The best circumstance is to cultivate a small group ~30-100 members or so, set firm expectations for participation, moderate aggressively (that is, promptly), though fairly and starting with social nudges. There's a balance between topic drift and derailment. Reddit varies hugely by subreddit, the good ones are exceptionally good. The site as a whole has some faults that leak through even to the good subs though. Ello has a very small (~10k or so daily, ~200k or so monthly visits) userbase, but it strikes me as quite well behaved for the most part, something I've commented on specifically to the site's admins. Imzy, the "kinder, gentler Reddit" has largely proven not to be. For reasons not entirely suprising when you combine an on-tap, ad libitum anonymity access, lacking leadership, overtaxed / AWOL moderation, exceptionally ill-conceived notifications, threading, and response mechanisms, and a community drawn from SRS and similar beds of vitriol. It's not the issues advocated for, but the methods of advocacy, including ample amounts of friendly fire and hypocrisy, which generate problems. I watched a trainwreck explode simply trying to discuss anonymity itself: https://ello.co/dredmorbius/post/qdxyzy2x4lbaq_4rx81nnw https://ello.co/dredmorbius/post/qdxyzy2x4lbaq_4rx81nnw

Klathmon 10y ago
I have tried most of them and feel largely the same. HN seems in that sweet spot for me where it is large enough to have a good amount of discussion but still has very good quality. Most "reddit but more free" sites turn into imzy or even worse voat. G+ communities are too small for me, and finding a good community is proving to be hard. And I've given up on reddit for any larger scale technical discussion (there's just too much vitriol and "my team is better" sentiment there. It always seems to focus on the negative, and creating a "positive only" subreddit seems like a bad idea, and it attracts the users that will fight that idea on principle) I'll need to try Ello though. Have you looked at lobsters? It's much smaller than HN but also more technical (and with its own share of bias against anything newer in my experience)