3 ms·

That's one way to view it. Personally, I think it works the opposite. The voting only gives the community so much power. Often the content starts dictating the

That's one way to view it. Personally, I think it works the opposite. The voting only gives the community so much power. Often the content starts dictating the community, not the other way around. With enough low effort and uninteresting content clogging up the chronological feed, you eventually see core- and power users migrating to other sites or communities. The community is eventually transplanted by those who seek out the kind of content that made the core community leave, perpetuating the new kind of content. I've seen it happen to a lot of subreddits.

ziml77 5y ago
I've seen it happen on various subreddits too, but preventing that is not done by blanket banning Twitter. It's by moderating the content so that the easy to consume stuff doesn't overwhelm the thoughtful content. And I do believe moderation is the only way to ensure the issue doesn't arise where quality content gets drowned out because the quick and easy to consume content will gather upvotes far faster.
danaris 5y ago
But...the community provides the content, too. It's not like submissions of Twitter posts just materialize out of the aether. They're made by HN users. So if you want different content, answer the question: What are you providing?
- hhjinks 5y ago
  I wouldn't say that the community provides the content. Some of it, yes, but anyone can provide content, be they passerby, lurker, or indeed part of the community. But generally, the lurkers vastly outnumber the participants. Therefore, the actual community has very little power in the face of the faceless and voiceless masses. hn is a pretty niche site, all things considered. Given a surge in popularity, an influx of new lurkers, you might see the type of link being upvoted change over night. Your voice is powerless, the vote decides everything, and the lurkers have 90% of the votes.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

ziml77 5y ago

I've seen it happen on various subreddits too, but preventing that is not done by blanket banning Twitter. It's by moderating the content so that the easy to consume stuff doesn't overwhelm the thoughtful content. And I do believe moderation is the only way to ensure the issue doesn't arise where quality content gets drowned out because the quick and easy to consume content will gather upvotes far faster.

danaris 5y ago

But...the community provides the content, too. It's not like submissions of Twitter posts just materialize out of the aether. They're made by HN users. So if you want different content, answer the question: What are you providing?

hhjinks 5y ago
I wouldn't say that the community provides the content. Some of it, yes, but anyone can provide content, be they passerby, lurker, or indeed part of the community. But generally, the lurkers vastly outnumber the participants. Therefore, the actual community has very little power in the face of the faceless and voiceless masses. hn is a pretty niche site, all things considered. Given a surge in popularity, an influx of new lurkers, you might see the type of link being upvoted change over night. Your voice is powerless, the vote decides everything, and the lurkers have 90% of the votes.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]