4 ms·
The problem with this is that many people here never bother to actually read the posted article, and initial comments will tend to bias the thread in a particul
by krapp 3y ago
The problem with this is that many people here never bother to actually read the posted article, and initial comments will tend to bias the thread in a particular direction, lowering discussion quality.
Discussion should be about the article, and the article should stand or fall on its own merits. Who posted it and why is irrelevant, that's what text posts are for.
If you can't find something worth commenting on, or if a subject doesn't interest you, then it's valid not to comment. It's preferable to have most submissions die quietly than to encourage mediocre conversation and fruitless engagement.
- johndunne 3y agoVery true. I've found new value in HN by rediscovering the new section. There are a lot of interesting topics posted to HN but I tend to have more interest in the comments/discussion. I realise now that I may actually be the minority in terms of how I use HN.
- krapp 3y agoI think most people here are primarily interested in the comments, but to me it's a matter of keeping things on point, and a preference for quality over quantity. To me, unless someone with actual experience and expertise in the subject matter at hand shows up in a thread (usually in contradiction of the prevailing zeitgeist,) the comments tend to be the least interesting part of this site. If you look past the "lists" link at the bottom of the page you can find other feeds, including "active" which sorts by comments.
- johndunne 3y agoThanks for that one. I've been using HN in autopilot for so long I've been missing out on some of the extra features HN offers. Thanks again!