Great quality post @BradfordCross. I've been thinking about the value of social sharing. Especially, quantity vs quality. Broad social sharing ('quantity' AKA

Great quality post @BradfordCross. I've been thinking about the value of social sharing. Especially, quantity vs quality. Broad social sharing ('quantity' AKA buzz, tweet, like, etc) returns little back to me. I've shared tons of links on twitter and essentially nobody says anything in return. But i check bit.ly (by adding a '+' to the url) and see some real use. I feel an obligation to only tweet interesting links for reputation purposes but it's not apparently rewarding. Contrast forward to HN (quality). Far less traffic, but great community interaction with the content. For me, the discource here is more valuable. Heck, down voting my comments is really valuable feedback (notice how on twitter you never get someone replying back to you with "that tweet sucked" (exception being, you threaten their reputation). Thus, HN completely alters how i interact with content. HN is only good at distributing certain things and we try to keep it unique here. For content creators, HN can be part of the social strategy but for content consumers on HN each comment seems more valuable than a retweet. Maybe that's why we are not tweeting links to HN discussions (things get less valuable in public). Does the quality of the HN community hurt the potential quantity of links spreading virally?