3 ms·

Thank you! But why does it change the timestamp?

by taubek 4y ago

lzooz 4y ago
Because it's plain and simple manipulation. If it wasn't meant to manipulate the front page it wouldn't alter the timestamp.
- Arnavion 4y ago
  Yes, and it also changes the timestamps of the user comments to perpetuate the illusion.
  - taubek 4y ago
    Interesting. My submit didn't have comments so I didn't notice that :)
    - Arnavion 4y ago
      https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30937892 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30937892
- bombcar 4y ago
  And just because it's manipulation doesn't mean it's bad (in my opinion) - it does what it intends to do and if it dies in second chance, it rots away. Any good community discussion site that maintains for years needs various forms of "manipulation", and this is a pretty minor one.
  - lzooz 4y ago
    Taking arbitrary submissions to the front page manually (without the necessary upvotes from users) and on top of that manipulating the timestamp so it looks like the submission is new and got there organically is bad.
    - bombcar 4y ago
      HN already automatically takes some of the new queue and puts it on the front page (there's always a very recent few votes link on any given homepage for a logged in user) - I see no problem with this at all. Adding an * footnoting what was done wouldn't serve much purpose.
    - macintux 4y ago
      “Bad” is subjective. Counter to your expectations, sure, but “bad” seems a bit of a simplistic take.
    - coldpie 4y ago
      Nah, I like it. I'm here for interesting news & discussion, not for a demonstration of some voting algorithm.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
jsnell 4y ago
So that people don't complain about a 2 day old post still being on the FP.
- SilasX 4y ago
  Weird. I personally consider a modified timestamp more confusing/worrying than an old post being on the front page, as the former modifies something that should be immutable, while the latter doesn't. Edit: Semi-related issue for comparison: one time, a contact DMed me on Discord to ask where a certain event was going to be held. Before I saw the message, she found the answer through other means and thus "helpfully" deleted her message to me. Same problem: that actually makes it more confusing because I see inconsistent state: the notification lives on in my phone, but it's no longer present in the chat history. Better to just say "never mind" than to modify history.
  - wyldfire 4y ago
    yeah - split the difference maybe and have the UI indicate "second chance" somehow. but I suppose HN likes to keep things simple (even if it's a bit confusing).
  - hutrdvnj 4y ago
    I agree. Modifying timestamps for features like in this case "second chance" is a very bad practice IMHO.
- loceng 4y ago
cma 4y ago
The algorithm uses timestamp with a kind of gravity calculation to make it fall off the page. They maybe just didn't want to have a separate display timestamp and second chance timestamp in the codebase and it was simpler to change it when reupping a post.

Thank you! But why does it change the timestamp?

by taubek 4y ago

Thank you! But why does it change the timestamp?

Because it's plain and simple manipulation. If it wasn't meant to manipulate the front page it wouldn't alter the timestamp.

Arnavion 4y ago
Yes, and it also changes the timestamps of the user comments to perpetuate the illusion.
- taubek 4y ago
  Interesting. My submit didn't have comments so I didn't notice that :)
  - Arnavion 4y ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30937892 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30937892
bombcar 4y ago
And just because it's manipulation doesn't mean it's bad (in my opinion) - it does what it intends to do and if it dies in second chance, it rots away. Any good community discussion site that maintains for years needs various forms of "manipulation", and this is a pretty minor one.
- lzooz 4y ago
  Taking arbitrary submissions to the front page manually (without the necessary upvotes from users) and on top of that manipulating the timestamp so it looks like the submission is new and got there organically is bad.
  - bombcar 4y ago
    HN already automatically takes some of the new queue and puts it on the front page (there's always a very recent few votes link on any given homepage for a logged in user) - I see no problem with this at all. Adding an * footnoting what was done wouldn't serve much purpose.
  - macintux 4y ago
    “Bad” is subjective. Counter to your expectations, sure, but “bad” seems a bit of a simplistic take.
  - coldpie 4y ago
    Nah, I like it. I'm here for interesting news & discussion, not for a demonstration of some voting algorithm.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

jsnell 4y ago

So that people don't complain about a 2 day old post still being on the FP.

SilasX 4y ago
Weird. I personally consider a modified timestamp more confusing/worrying than an old post being on the front page, as the former modifies something that should be immutable, while the latter doesn't. Edit: Semi-related issue for comparison: one time, a contact DMed me on Discord to ask where a certain event was going to be held. Before I saw the message, she found the answer through other means and thus "helpfully" deleted her message to me. Same problem: that actually makes it more confusing because I see inconsistent state: the notification lives on in my phone, but it's no longer present in the chat history. Better to just say "never mind" than to modify history.
- wyldfire 4y ago
  yeah - split the difference maybe and have the UI indicate "second chance" somehow. but I suppose HN likes to keep things simple (even if it's a bit confusing).
- hutrdvnj 4y ago
  I agree. Modifying timestamps for features like in this case "second chance" is a very bad practice IMHO.
loceng 4y ago

cma 4y ago

The algorithm uses timestamp with a kind of gravity calculation to make it fall off the page. They maybe just didn't want to have a separate display timestamp and second chance timestamp in the codebase and it was simpler to change it when reupping a post.