3 ms·

Making a Referrer handler like that is a great way to let me know that you're probably not worth the read anyway, because you're not likely one to listen to any

Making a Referrer handler like that is a great way to let me know that you're probably not worth the read anyway, because you're not likely one to listen to anybody else. I've never once found HN a toxic place in the last 4 years. A place to meet people with different opinions and have discussions about those opinions, yeah, but that's beneficial -- literally the opposite of toxic.

rusbus 8y ago
Having had a few posts show up on HN from my site usually because I posted them (although not always), I can say that the comments are frequently nitpicky, unrelated to what you're talking about, and frequently unnecessarily critical. They rarely engage in the substance, and instead engage aggressively in minutiae. Not wanting to have to deal with the HN comments on your work is something I completely understand.
- andrewstuart2 8y ago
  I'm not saying I don't understand, but I am saying that I've found it more valuable to engage with nitpickers (and learn their perspective while sharing mine) than to continue to do my work in a vacuum free of nitpickers. I've got plenty of nits worth picking. I think most people do.
lifthrasiir 8y ago
My personal opinions: - HN is generally favorable than many other websites, but only because those websites are hopelessly toxic. - Voting system works well for filtering non-informative contents out, but it does prefer some kinds of informative contents than others. - Conflicts in HN are not common, but once started they are hard to control. HN is not a good place for managing conflicts; it's only good for mild discussions and it has no effective measure to stop discussions from becoming conflicts. - Of course there are many different opinions less represented in HN. Some of them can be considered as to an inherent bias of HN.
andersonmvd 8y ago
You just rationalized being rejected from a website because you came from HN. The truth is that you don't know what "toxic" means by the author's own definition or what led him to think that way. It may or may have anything to do with "listening to other people". Perhaps this defense is toxic already. And just telling that some place is great for you does not mean that it's great for others.
downandout 8y ago
A place to meet people with different opinions and have discussions about those opinions It depends on the topic. Recently, many topics have laid bare the groupthink attitude of the HN community. Any comments even questioning those views, much less actually expressing an opposite view, are instantly downvoted and derided in replies. This attitude is pervasive, all the way up to management. I am currently rate-limited, for example, because I was against GDPR. I was told by @dang: ”I'd be happy to lift the rate limit after these repetitive GDPR controversy threads have died down.” In other words, as soon as my opinion is irrelevant because there are no threads about it, I can speak again. That’s pretty much as toxic as it gets.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

rusbus 8y ago

Having had a few posts show up on HN from my site usually because I posted them (although not always), I can say that the comments are frequently nitpicky, unrelated to what you're talking about, and frequently unnecessarily critical. They rarely engage in the substance, and instead engage aggressively in minutiae. Not wanting to have to deal with the HN comments on your work is something I completely understand.

andrewstuart2 8y ago
I'm not saying I don't understand, but I am saying that I've found it more valuable to engage with nitpickers (and learn their perspective while sharing mine) than to continue to do my work in a vacuum free of nitpickers. I've got plenty of nits worth picking. I think most people do.

lifthrasiir 8y ago

My personal opinions: - HN is generally favorable than many other websites, but only because those websites are hopelessly toxic. - Voting system works well for filtering non-informative contents out, but it does prefer some kinds of informative contents than others. - Conflicts in HN are not common, but once started they are hard to control. HN is not a good place for managing conflicts; it's only good for mild discussions and it has no effective measure to stop discussions from becoming conflicts. - Of course there are many different opinions less represented in HN. Some of them can be considered as to an inherent bias of HN.

andersonmvd 8y ago

You just rationalized being rejected from a website because you came from HN. The truth is that you don't know what "toxic" means by the author's own definition or what led him to think that way. It may or may have anything to do with "listening to other people". Perhaps this defense is toxic already. And just telling that some place is great for you does not mean that it's great for others.

downandout 8y ago

A place to meet people with different opinions and have discussions about those opinions It depends on the topic. Recently, many topics have laid bare the groupthink attitude of the HN community. Any comments even questioning those views, much less actually expressing an opposite view, are instantly downvoted and derided in replies. This attitude is pervasive, all the way up to management. I am currently rate-limited, for example, because I was against GDPR. I was told by @dang: ”I'd be happy to lift the rate limit after these repetitive GDPR controversy threads have died down.” In other words, as soon as my opinion is irrelevant because there are no threads about it, I can speak again. That’s pretty much as toxic as it gets.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]