4 ms·

> If you don't care about showing off then you won't publish anything I want to agree, but how can we explain near-anonymous StackOverflow profiles who have br

> If you don't care about showing off then you won't publish anything I want to agree, but how can we explain near-anonymous StackOverflow profiles who have brilliant answers in them, but no way to identify who the actual person they are?

leftyted 7y ago
Anonymity doesn't change the equation. No one on hackernews knows who I am but I still want the recognition of my peers (upvotes) which is why I'm posting here. The fact that everyone ultimately wants peer-approval means we need to create participatory structures in which people are rewarded (with approval) for doing useful things. Stackoverflow is a perfect example of this. People gain karma by answering questions that other people ask. "Everyone should have a blog" is the opposite of this. It's feel-good nonsense along the lines of "everyone has their own subjective truth and all truths are equal". If we tell everyone to publish it will become near-impossible to find voices worth hearing. It's like saying you should answer every question on stackoverflow whether or not you know the answer.
- pbhjpbhj 7y ago
  You're leftyted, I see you! People see different facets of our identity, only God sees all of them. In some cases our limited online presence might represent a more authentic version of our 'true selves' than we present in [the rest of] "real life". >"it will become near-impossible to find voices worth hearing" // Isn't the OP saying there that we all have a voice worth hearing. You're right that it would be harder to find the voices we could extract the most value from; but realistically that's probably already impossible.
EADGBE 7y ago
Most of my Stack Overflow karma has come from edits. Just like in real life; I'll underwhelm the average sleuth with the amount of badges I have vs. the work I've actually done.

4 ms·

> If you don't care about showing off then you won't publish anything I want to agree, but how can we explain near-anonymous StackOverflow profiles who have br

by thameera 7y ago

leftyted 7y ago
Anonymity doesn't change the equation. No one on hackernews knows who I am but I still want the recognition of my peers (upvotes) which is why I'm posting here. The fact that everyone ultimately wants peer-approval means we need to create participatory structures in which people are rewarded (with approval) for doing useful things. Stackoverflow is a perfect example of this. People gain karma by answering questions that other people ask. "Everyone should have a blog" is the opposite of this. It's feel-good nonsense along the lines of "everyone has their own subjective truth and all truths are equal". If we tell everyone to publish it will become near-impossible to find voices worth hearing. It's like saying you should answer every question on stackoverflow whether or not you know the answer.
- pbhjpbhj 7y ago
  You're leftyted, I see you! People see different facets of our identity, only God sees all of them. In some cases our limited online presence might represent a more authentic version of our 'true selves' than we present in [the rest of] "real life". >"it will become near-impossible to find voices worth hearing" // Isn't the OP saying there that we all have a voice worth hearing. You're right that it would be harder to find the voices we could extract the most value from; but realistically that's probably already impossible.
EADGBE 7y ago
Most of my Stack Overflow karma has come from edits. Just like in real life; I'll underwhelm the average sleuth with the amount of badges I have vs. the work I've actually done.