6 ms·

This post is decaying off of the front page of HN very quickly (every few refreshes it drops a position or more), despite have more upvotes and being posted mor

This post is decaying off of the front page of HN very quickly (every few refreshes it drops a position or more), despite have more upvotes and being posted more recently. Reddit is a YC company as well. Is this post being artificially pushed down?

scott_karana 10y ago
It's well known that HN has anti-flamewar algorithms. Too many comments vs votes (or user flagging too, presumably) causes its rank to drop.
- Figs 10y ago
  I've been here fairly regularly for 8 years and didn't know about it, so I'm not sure I agree that it's "well known". It definitely isn't in the FAQ's section about how stories are ranked: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html -- which, in my opinion, would be an excellent place to describe it. I'm glad dang answered though since I've been wondering for quite a while why some stories seemed to sink much faster than others.
  - noobermin 10y ago
    As with most "well-known" things, it is well-known by people who know.
  - dang 10y ago
    Putting it in the FAQ is a good idea, and if anyone who doesn't see it there in a week or two would email hn@ycombinator.com to bug me about it, I'd be thankful. Except wait, are you saying anyone reads the FAQ? An idea that came up recently which we're mulling over is showing 'vouch' links (or something analogous) on stories that are being penalized this way, so users can indicate that they think a discussion is really substantive.
    - Figs 10y ago
      Sure, I'll check in a week or so and remind you if needed. > Except wait, are you saying anyone reads the FAQ? Fair point :) The 'vouch' idea is interesting, but I'm not sure if you really need another click mechanism to accomplish it -- if people above a certain karma threshold are voting it up, it's a topic that people integrated into the community do think is worth being seen, regardless of the quality of the discussion currently in the thread. That said, it might be worth trying -- having a visible indicator might result in a different reaction; it's possible that the majority of such stories would get vouched, which could be a useful signal in tuning your algorithm.
      - dang 10y ago
        > if people above a certain karma threshold are voting it up Sadly, that just doesn't work as well as it seems like it ought to. In fact it's crazy how well it doesn't work.
        nl 10y ago
        You could try the opposite: give entirely random people the ability to vouch. I have no idea if this would work, but.. I've been doing lots of ML lately where it is often pretty hard to beat random, and throwing noise into a system make it much more robust.
        maket 10y ago
        I agree about noise, but you'd need to be careful. People would try to game it by giving themselves as many random chances as possible, by making many accounts or doing whatever was necessary. It could undermine the legitimacy of the system, as well as put more load on the server.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
dang 10y ago
Nope. Literally the first rule of HN moderation is that we don't do that—i.e., we moderate stories less, not more, when they're negative about YC or a YC startup. Also, we were slacking this afternoon (where by slacking I mean hacking on an arc compiler) and had no clue this thread existed. It set off the overheated discussion detector (a.k.a. flamewar detector), which lowers the rank of a thread. We do turn that penalty off for particularly substantive discussions—which, though this may surprise you, I'm not sure this one is. Not every Reddit drama shitshow is uniform in its excellence. Can I say that without evil catnip effects? Edit: ok, we've reduced the penalty and changed the title to something the post actually says. (The submitted title, "Reddit CEO admits to altering user comments that were critical of him", breaks the HN guideline about not changing titles unless they are misleading or linkbait. Please don't do that when submitting here.)
- rkcr 10y ago
  What about people who just click on links and don't view comments? Won't they be missing out just because the discussion in the comments isn't great?
  - dang 10y ago
    Story quality and comment quality have mystical connections.
- arkadiyt 10y ago
  Appreciate the response - thanks!
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- Sir_Cmpwn 10y ago
  -1 to the title change. The current title doesn't convey the situation effectively and imo serves to hide the true nature of the incident. There isn't really an article title to source from here, anyway.
tptacek 10y ago
I regret that I have but one flag to give.

scott_karana 10y ago

It's well known that HN has anti-flamewar algorithms. Too many comments vs votes (or user flagging too, presumably) causes its rank to drop.

Figs 10y ago
I've been here fairly regularly for 8 years and didn't know about it, so I'm not sure I agree that it's "well known". It definitely isn't in the FAQ's section about how stories are ranked: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html -- which, in my opinion, would be an excellent place to describe it. I'm glad dang answered though since I've been wondering for quite a while why some stories seemed to sink much faster than others.
- noobermin 10y ago
  As with most "well-known" things, it is well-known by people who know.
- dang 10y ago
  Putting it in the FAQ is a good idea, and if anyone who doesn't see it there in a week or two would email hn@ycombinator.com to bug me about it, I'd be thankful. Except wait, are you saying anyone reads the FAQ? An idea that came up recently which we're mulling over is showing 'vouch' links (or something analogous) on stories that are being penalized this way, so users can indicate that they think a discussion is really substantive.
  - Figs 10y ago
    Sure, I'll check in a week or so and remind you if needed. > Except wait, are you saying anyone reads the FAQ? Fair point :) The 'vouch' idea is interesting, but I'm not sure if you really need another click mechanism to accomplish it -- if people above a certain karma threshold are voting it up, it's a topic that people integrated into the community do think is worth being seen, regardless of the quality of the discussion currently in the thread. That said, it might be worth trying -- having a visible indicator might result in a different reaction; it's possible that the majority of such stories would get vouched, which could be a useful signal in tuning your algorithm.
    - dang 10y ago
      > if people above a certain karma threshold are voting it up Sadly, that just doesn't work as well as it seems like it ought to. In fact it's crazy how well it doesn't work.
      - nl 10y ago
        You could try the opposite: give entirely random people the ability to vouch. I have no idea if this would work, but.. I've been doing lots of ML lately where it is often pretty hard to beat random, and throwing noise into a system make it much more robust.
        maket 10y ago
        I agree about noise, but you'd need to be careful. People would try to game it by giving themselves as many random chances as possible, by making many accounts or doing whatever was necessary. It could undermine the legitimacy of the system, as well as put more load on the server.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

dang 10y ago

Nope. Literally the first rule of HN moderation is that we don't do that—i.e., we moderate stories less, not more, when they're negative about YC or a YC startup. Also, we were slacking this afternoon (where by slacking I mean hacking on an arc compiler) and had no clue this thread existed. It set off the overheated discussion detector (a.k.a. flamewar detector), which lowers the rank of a thread. We do turn that penalty off for particularly substantive discussions—which, though this may surprise you, I'm not sure this one is. Not every Reddit drama shitshow is uniform in its excellence. Can I say that without evil catnip effects? Edit: ok, we've reduced the penalty and changed the title to something the post actually says. (The submitted title, "Reddit CEO admits to altering user comments that were critical of him", breaks the HN guideline about not changing titles unless they are misleading or linkbait. Please don't do that when submitting here.)

rkcr 10y ago
What about people who just click on links and don't view comments? Won't they be missing out just because the discussion in the comments isn't great?
- dang 10y ago
  Story quality and comment quality have mystical connections.
arkadiyt 10y ago
Appreciate the response - thanks!
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
Sir_Cmpwn 10y ago
-1 to the title change. The current title doesn't convey the situation effectively and imo serves to hide the true nature of the incident. There isn't really an article title to source from here, anyway.

tptacek 10y ago

I regret that I have but one flag to give.