4 ms·
> Meta is basically crack, so we routinely downweight such posts Interesting that you make a drug analogy. What's wrong with letting HN users have their crack?
by md224 10y ago
> Meta is basically crack, so we routinely downweight such posts
Interesting that you make a drug analogy. What's wrong with letting HN users have their crack? Unlike actual crack, there's no danger of side effects, dependency, withdrawal, etc. Maybe the "upvoting trance" is the expression of a sincere communal desire? It's not like it's "trashy" content... meta is simply self-reflection. Why penalize it?
Maybe the fear is that the front page will be overrun with meta content... that makes sense, but I feel like one or two meta posts couldn't hurt. I think self-consciousness is a positive attribute for a community.
- jrs235 10y agoSpeaking of meta, perhaps there could be a Meta: area strictly for meta discussions, similarly to Ask HN:? Then the meta addicts could congregate and upvote all the want there? A slight modification might need to be made so that Meta: prefaced titles never appear in the regular submission queue, or if they do they start with a huge negative factor.
- twic 10y agoThis is more or less what works for Stack Overflow. How about if there was a bit associated with every post that indicates whether it's meta or not. A submitter can set it when they post if they like; a mod can set or clear it later. Perhaps users could flag posts as being meta as well, i don't know. Then we just take all the meta posts off the main page, and show them on another top-level page like Ask HN or Show HN. I i think i'd be happy for meta posts to appear on the 'new' page. There aren't that many of them, so they won't flood it. If they get upvoted, they get promoted to a different place to substantive posts, so they won't clog it. It's a bit like a GC which allocates large objects in the nursery, so you can still, eg, create a scratch buffer quickly, but promotes them to a large-object heap instead of the normal tenuring generations.
- JoblessWonder 10y agoI'm in no way affiliated but I think it would be to cut down on what "shitposts" that are just meta-related and are low quality posts. While this one seems to have interesting theories, over on Reddit there is a scourge of highly upvoted posts that do little to nothing to motivate discussion or contribute to the community.
- dang 10y agoI call it 'crack' semi-facetiously and semi-affectionately, but it's an interesting analogy to play with. > Unlike actual crack, there's no danger of side effects There's a big danger of side effects to HN itself. When taken excessively—the natural tendency—it makes the site less intellectually interesting, which alienates the best kinds of user (and attracts the less best kinds). Maybe if we could be like David Cross and just do crack once each... > one or two meta posts couldn't hurt. I think self-consciousness is a positive attribute for a community This I agree with but HN is extremely well-resourced in this area. The intention behind penalizing such stories, as I tried to explain above, is not to suppress them but to countervail.