> I disagree that HN is quite so negative: I see a lot of discussions where people are productively expanding a discussion on a post. That’s why I keep coming

> I disagree that HN is quite so negative: I see a lot of discussions where people are productively expanding a discussion on a post. That’s why I keep coming back to HN. But even I have to admit that those valuable posts are in the minority of comments these days. You’re right that the HN community tries to dissect everything, but a staggering number of those dissection attempts are coming from people who don’t know what they’re talking about or who didn’t bother reading the article. I’ve seen countless comment sections where the majority of comments are from angry people who clearly didn’t read the article but want to complain about what they assumed the article said. Worse, the bad comments are often extremely confident despite being wrong. This effect is most obvious when you click on a comment section for something you know very deeply, only to see highly upvoted comments saying things that can often be disproved with 2 minutes of Googling. The good comments can still be found, but it takes work to find them. I think Dan Luu said it best: > HN comments are terrible. On any topic I’m informed about, the vast majority of comments are pretty clearly wrong. Most of the time, there are zero comments from people who know anything about the topic and the top comment is reasonable sounding but totally incorrect. Additionally, many comments are gratuitously mean. His full blog post: https://danluu.com/hn-comments/ https://danluu.com/hn-comments/