4 ms·
And yet, often I want to submit a link and find I can't because it was discussed 11 months ago? Even if some recent event has rendered it worthy of revisiting?
by dTal 6y ago
And yet, often I want to submit a link and find I can't because it was discussed 11 months ago? Even if some recent event has rendered it worthy of revisiting?
I consider HN's combination of highly transient discussion (by design) and prohibition on revisiting a topic for a year to be its biggest flaw. Either it should commit fully to transience, and let people discuss whatever they want whenever they want (and permit people to delete comments in perpetuity), or fully commit to being an archive, one thread per link forever.
- wolf550e 6y agoWhat HN does now is very good. Posts and comments belong to the community, so they can't be edited or deleted after some time. Not allowing frequent multiple submission is a good heuristic, but if something important happened and there is no good new URL you can submit, you can either create a blog post / tweet announcing the new thing and submit that or message 'dang and ask to submit an old URL even though not enough time has passed.
- dredmorbius 6y agoI can confirm that dang is quite receptive to suggestions, and submissions that tend to broaden the HN perspective (he's specifically mentioned historical pieces) are strongly encouraged.
- dredmorbius 6y agoI was aiming for a tongue-in-cheek way of noting this had been recently discussed, without quite naming this a dupe, though by HN guidelines it probably is. HN isn't beyond a level of repeated discussion, and even has accrued a set of perennial favourites. Diamonds in particular are forever: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26701421 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26701421 Also eyeglasses: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19317023 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19317023 Ongoing stories / long-term developing issues and phenomena can see new developments/understanding hashed out. Largely-similar stories without new developments, not so much. See dang's comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22014114 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22014114 With new research, there's a fairly predictable progression from pre-publication releases, journal article, discussion of article, hot- and cold-takes, researcher interviews, criticisms, books, reviews of book, etc., etc. Each adding to the earlier in a manner much as this particular article discussus. Though that's in large part simply a dynamic of today's media environment. "The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun."