3 ms·

I would be very interested in understanding the psychology of the 1%. I would bet they (we? I mostly lurk, but am still probably at least in the top 10%) are a

I would be very interested in understanding the psychology of the 1%. I would bet they (we? I mostly lurk, but am still probably at least in the top 10%) are a very weird bunch.

DrNuke 7y ago
More probably they (we) are selling something... or even themselves?
themodelplumber 7y ago
I have worked closely with some phenomenal 1%-ers. :-) They are really efficient at processing broad information in what you could call a shallow manner. They also don't feel the depth-of-comprehension pressure that some of us 99%-ers feel. To them it's just interesting, interesting, ah wow, next thing, ok cool...that sort of thing. It's like rolling down the windows in your car, letting in some outside air. Sharing is fun, in part because the personally-felt pressure to _do_ in response (learn about it, make something of it) is low, in their experience. The 99% audience is comprised of a lot of people who are a FOMO audience, and this flow can create serious stress for the portion of those people who read about a new idea and they feel the need to _do_ something about it. Meanwhile the 1% crew are often sharing third-party info briefly and broadly, with brief commentary, but no real interest or pressure to seriously do something or make something. IMO each group can be said to carry really impressive gifts/benefits. And encouraging lurkers to post is always nice, but many of them also secretly wish for a more inviting / less critical community. HN has a _lot_ of commenters ready to smash the next idea into bits by intuiting its flaws, and some will naturally take that as a sign of a toxic community, or at least one that isn't as welcoming in their view. It's tough to work on this issue because it can radically affect the balance of the community psychology and upset larger groups of people.
nhumrich 7y ago
I think it moreso has to do with that we ourselves only put time into so many things. For example, I myself probably read 99 or more articles on HN for every 1 I actually comment on. Take that to a general level, there are a lot of platfoms were I lurk, and very few were I actually participate. Putting your words on the screen takes mental effort that we selectively choose where to focus such efforts
imtringued 7y ago
It's pretty easy. Doing anything is a skill that you can hone by repeating it. There are lots of people who haven't posted anything and they are inexperienced at posting comments. Once you have posted a few hundred comments you've become comfortable with posting regularly. Then it suddenly becomes obvious that you cannot be super skilled at everything. Maybe you are a frequent HN user but not someone who answers questions on Stackoverflow.

I would be very interested in understanding the psychology of the 1%. I would bet they (we? I mostly lurk, but am still probably at least in the top 10%) are a very weird bunch.

DrNuke 7y ago

More probably they (we) are selling something... or even themselves?

themodelplumber 7y ago

I have worked closely with some phenomenal 1%-ers. :-) They are really efficient at processing broad information in what you could call a shallow manner. They also don't feel the depth-of-comprehension pressure that some of us 99%-ers feel. To them it's just interesting, interesting, ah wow, next thing, ok cool...that sort of thing. It's like rolling down the windows in your car, letting in some outside air. Sharing is fun, in part because the personally-felt pressure to _do_ in response (learn about it, make something of it) is low, in their experience. The 99% audience is comprised of a lot of people who are a FOMO audience, and this flow can create serious stress for the portion of those people who read about a new idea and they feel the need to _do_ something about it. Meanwhile the 1% crew are often sharing third-party info briefly and broadly, with brief commentary, but no real interest or pressure to seriously do something or make something. IMO each group can be said to carry really impressive gifts/benefits. And encouraging lurkers to post is always nice, but many of them also secretly wish for a more inviting / less critical community. HN has a _lot_ of commenters ready to smash the next idea into bits by intuiting its flaws, and some will naturally take that as a sign of a toxic community, or at least one that isn't as welcoming in their view. It's tough to work on this issue because it can radically affect the balance of the community psychology and upset larger groups of people.

nhumrich 7y ago

I think it moreso has to do with that we ourselves only put time into so many things. For example, I myself probably read 99 or more articles on HN for every 1 I actually comment on. Take that to a general level, there are a lot of platfoms were I lurk, and very few were I actually participate. Putting your words on the screen takes mental effort that we selectively choose where to focus such efforts

imtringued 7y ago

It's pretty easy. Doing anything is a skill that you can hone by repeating it. There are lots of people who haven't posted anything and they are inexperienced at posting comments. Once you have posted a few hundred comments you've become comfortable with posting regularly. Then it suddenly becomes obvious that you cannot be super skilled at everything. Maybe you are a frequent HN user but not someone who answers questions on Stackoverflow.