4 ms·

To be honest, I don’t think this kind of conversation is worthwhile on HN. There are very few facts here, just opinions. I’m all for posting authoritative info

To be honest, I don’t think this kind of conversation is worthwhile on HN. There are very few facts here, just opinions. I’m all for posting authoritative information, and interesting side-effects. But just shooting around opinions is best left for Twitter, Facebook, Reddit.

dang 7y ago
The dividing line for what's on topic on HN not fact vs. opinion, it's intellectual curiosity (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html). That doesn't limit itself to authoritative information, by definition. Speculation is inevitable. The question is whether it's curious (thoughtful and fresh) or uncurious (reflexive and predictable).
- Veen 7y ago
  But ignorant speculation during a crisis can have serious consequences. Look the fools in this thread claiming that the UK government is deliberately culling the sick and elderly. The last thing we need is ideas like that getting widespread acceptance and causing civil unrest and distrust of the authorities who are essential to managing the situation.
  - dang 7y ago
    It's true. But ignorant speculation forms a chunk of every thread. The solution isn't to try to restrict posting to authorized opinion—that would cause more harm than good and is impossible anyway. The solution—well, there's no solution, but the best we can do—is to let the community respond when it's able to function, and moderate the threads to the extent that it's not. When I last looked in on this one, it seemed to me that the community was functioning ok—noticeably better, in fact, than in most of the coronavirus discussions, which are highly repetitive. Repetition is bad on HN, not only because it's lacking in intellectual curiosity, but because it leads to flamewars. The mind seems to resort to conflict to amuse itself when nothing new and interesting is available.

dang 7y ago

The dividing line for what's on topic on HN not fact vs. opinion, it's intellectual curiosity (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html). That doesn't limit itself to authoritative information, by definition. Speculation is inevitable. The question is whether it's curious (thoughtful and fresh) or uncurious (reflexive and predictable).

Veen 7y ago
But ignorant speculation during a crisis can have serious consequences. Look the fools in this thread claiming that the UK government is deliberately culling the sick and elderly. The last thing we need is ideas like that getting widespread acceptance and causing civil unrest and distrust of the authorities who are essential to managing the situation.
- dang 7y ago
  It's true. But ignorant speculation forms a chunk of every thread. The solution isn't to try to restrict posting to authorized opinion—that would cause more harm than good and is impossible anyway. The solution—well, there's no solution, but the best we can do—is to let the community respond when it's able to function, and moderate the threads to the extent that it's not. When I last looked in on this one, it seemed to me that the community was functioning ok—noticeably better, in fact, than in most of the coronavirus discussions, which are highly repetitive. Repetition is bad on HN, not only because it's lacking in intellectual curiosity, but because it leads to flamewars. The mind seems to resort to conflict to amuse itself when nothing new and interesting is available.