I do see an enormously & overwhelmingly critical perspective on this site, see critiques & criticisms & disbelief strongly expressed in article after article af

I do see an enormously & overwhelmingly critical perspective on this site, see critiques & criticisms & disbelief strongly expressed in article after article after article. Alas most of the criticism of HN as a site is non-constructive, arrives only after someone blows their top. We should be thankful for a post like this where we can stare in the mirror some, with only so so distortion, understand what our own gaze is & looks like. A lot of the presence of so much negativity is just the nature of the net/communication. Those who like & enjoy a thing only occasionally have anything to add. "+1" is a button, not a message. The heat & zeal of criticism, of someone else being erong on the internet, sets a much bigger fire under folk. This isnt a thought particular to HN, but i do think it's worth goong back & experimenting with more meta-moderative systems. Identifying not hust up-vote doen-vote good/bad, but whether users are making positive or negative contributions is a dimension I'd like to explore more, particularly over time. So we can, when we run into comments, form a more general ssessment of a person's nature g demeanor. Karma tells me very little to be honest, karma/posts only a little more but not much. Assessing each other & also getting to learn more about ourselves is of huge interest to me. Let there be more sunshine!