3 ms·

> As far as I'm concerned, posting any content of value on any platform or service that you don't pay for and don't have a good control over is a bad idea. It d

> As far as I'm concerned, posting any content of value on any platform or service that you don't pay for and don't have a good control over is a bad idea. It doesn't matter if it's Medium or Facebook or Instagram or Quora or anything else. Playing devils advocate for a moment: what about HN? I get this place generally behaves differently but the points you discuss doesn't explicitly exclude HN.

newscracker 8y ago
There are many places that I didn’t mention. And I did forget HN, to be honest. But you’re right — what I said applies to any long form and/or thoughtful/useful content, even on HN.
- laumars 8y ago
  I've seen similar discussions about Stack Overflow as well. At one time people really welcomed comments being posted on there but some people have since become a little jaded due to how strictly moderated that site is. While it keeps the place in order, it does also mean anyone who might disagree with a moderators decision - even when they have genuinely thoughtful content to post - is left out from the community. One day people might say something equivalent about HN. So your points are valid about HN if just at a theoretical level.
  - mindgam3 8y ago
    It’s not just valid theoretically. There is a cognitive bias on HN in certain hot button topics including psychiatry, addiction, and Facebook. Dissenting opinions there run the risk of getting you trolled and flagged under dubious pretenses. Overall the moderation system here works better than any other I’ve seen on the internet, but like any organization of humans there are some dysfunctional areas where power prevails over logic.
conjectures 8y ago
You can't really have a discussion by everyone posting on a separate site. So I guess it boils down to whether things you type on HN are discussion or 'content'.
- laumars 8y ago
  There are federated platforms that let you do this - or at least a lot closer to that kind of reality than a forum / HN style site does. You do make an interesting distinction though. My counterargument would be "Ask HN" style topics where the entire content is hosted on HN - however I don't disagree with the point you're making either.
  - em-bee 8y ago
    can you point to some good examples of how that looks like?
gowld 8y ago
It's a bad idea to post content of lasting value on HN. You can't edit or delete old posts, for example.
- kazinator 8y ago
  If it has lasting value why would it require editing or deleting? Do we edit or delete paragraphs from Moby Dick, or notes from Brahms? :)
  - teh_klev 8y ago
    Spelling corrections, factual accuracy corrections that kinda thing needs the ability to be edited. Using HN to publish "lasting value" content isn't the same as publishing a book where likely you'd work with an editor to reach the final error free imprint. Even an e-book can be updated to allow corrections, and future print editions can be published with corrections or an errata. After a certain time limit you can't even add a new reply to your own "lasting value" post that could contain these types of changes.

newscracker 8y ago

There are many places that I didn’t mention. And I did forget HN, to be honest. But you’re right — what I said applies to any long form and/or thoughtful/useful content, even on HN.

laumars 8y ago
I've seen similar discussions about Stack Overflow as well. At one time people really welcomed comments being posted on there but some people have since become a little jaded due to how strictly moderated that site is. While it keeps the place in order, it does also mean anyone who might disagree with a moderators decision - even when they have genuinely thoughtful content to post - is left out from the community. One day people might say something equivalent about HN. So your points are valid about HN if just at a theoretical level.
- mindgam3 8y ago
  It’s not just valid theoretically. There is a cognitive bias on HN in certain hot button topics including psychiatry, addiction, and Facebook. Dissenting opinions there run the risk of getting you trolled and flagged under dubious pretenses. Overall the moderation system here works better than any other I’ve seen on the internet, but like any organization of humans there are some dysfunctional areas where power prevails over logic.

conjectures 8y ago

You can't really have a discussion by everyone posting on a separate site. So I guess it boils down to whether things you type on HN are discussion or 'content'.

laumars 8y ago
There are federated platforms that let you do this - or at least a lot closer to that kind of reality than a forum / HN style site does. You do make an interesting distinction though. My counterargument would be "Ask HN" style topics where the entire content is hosted on HN - however I don't disagree with the point you're making either.
- em-bee 8y ago
  can you point to some good examples of how that looks like?

gowld 8y ago

It's a bad idea to post content of lasting value on HN. You can't edit or delete old posts, for example.

kazinator 8y ago
If it has lasting value why would it require editing or deleting? Do we edit or delete paragraphs from Moby Dick, or notes from Brahms? :)
- teh_klev 8y ago
  Spelling corrections, factual accuracy corrections that kinda thing needs the ability to be edited. Using HN to publish "lasting value" content isn't the same as publishing a book where likely you'd work with an editor to reach the final error free imprint. Even an e-book can be updated to allow corrections, and future print editions can be published with corrections or an errata. After a certain time limit you can't even add a new reply to your own "lasting value" post that could contain these types of changes.