4 ms·

Because a sudden influx of new users tends to change the culture of an existig community. People don't like that. I know I was shunned for making low effort com

Because a sudden influx of new users tends to change the culture of an existig community. People don't like that. I know I was shunned for making low effort comments when first arriving here from Reddit, and in retrospect I'm glad that I wasn't coddled, I wasn't made to feel welcome, I had to learn the rules and now this is my favorite corner of the internet, because HN changed me, not the other way around.

berkes 3y ago
I think we can differentiate between rules that are in place to uphold a certain standard, and those that stop change from happening at all. The latter is guarantee for obsolence. The former a way to allow change, but not have that change affect the core of the community. E.g. at HN, deep conversations are core. So it makes sense to protect that with rules on friendlyness, effort and topics. But it's always a thin line and a spectrum. Something many (software) communities or community-leaders have a hard time with. So they go for absolutism. And often don't allow any change. The worst reason for (not) doing something is "we've always done it this way". Yet in many (software and FLOSS) communities that is exactly what is upheld. Keeping out new influences but also keeping out fresh members, ideas and users.
theaussiestew 3y ago
He never suggested that the influx of newbies should change the existing culture, precisely the opposite. The existing culture doesn't do a good enough job of helping onboard the newbies in a gentle way that integrates them. Instead, there's just indifference to this process.
- xk3 3y ago
  > Instead, there's just indifference to this process kind of. There are two things that often happen if people don't integrate, mostly wrt company culture: 1. The newbies don't integrate because they have created their own culture because either they don't realize that they are excluded from the "adults table" (different departments, etc) or that their experiences interacting with the existing hierarchy makes them want to reject the existing culture. They surround the "core" even though they may not often interact with it (and maybe management realizes this but most often not). Maybe they do some shadow IT but the projects that they work on are not core to the business because they are locked out from those systems and the work that they do is seen as useless because it is never integrated (maybe their code kind of sucks because they don't get mentorship, etc). The core is mostly untouched by the social group(s) that surround it. The different social groups are not as rigid as departments but if the core has any legitimate power the non-complaint people are usually shuffled around. Some people in the "wrong-group" may learn to respect the existing culture and they are promoted into the sacrosanct. 2. Similar to #1 except that the newbies are better at self-marketing or socializing with management and eventually the core culture is entirely replaced by the newer culture. The business allows this, even perhaps risking business continuity, because they start to see the old clique as stubborn, not inclusive, not open to change or suggestions, perhaps even a liability to the company. This happens with open source projects as well
Lewton 3y ago
When I first joined, pg himself replied directly to me telling me to do better or post less lol

berkes 3y ago

I think we can differentiate between rules that are in place to uphold a certain standard, and those that stop change from happening at all. The latter is guarantee for obsolence. The former a way to allow change, but not have that change affect the core of the community. E.g. at HN, deep conversations are core. So it makes sense to protect that with rules on friendlyness, effort and topics. But it's always a thin line and a spectrum. Something many (software) communities or community-leaders have a hard time with. So they go for absolutism. And often don't allow any change. The worst reason for (not) doing something is "we've always done it this way". Yet in many (software and FLOSS) communities that is exactly what is upheld. Keeping out new influences but also keeping out fresh members, ideas and users.

theaussiestew 3y ago

He never suggested that the influx of newbies should change the existing culture, precisely the opposite. The existing culture doesn't do a good enough job of helping onboard the newbies in a gentle way that integrates them. Instead, there's just indifference to this process.

xk3 3y ago
> Instead, there's just indifference to this process kind of. There are two things that often happen if people don't integrate, mostly wrt company culture: 1. The newbies don't integrate because they have created their own culture because either they don't realize that they are excluded from the "adults table" (different departments, etc) or that their experiences interacting with the existing hierarchy makes them want to reject the existing culture. They surround the "core" even though they may not often interact with it (and maybe management realizes this but most often not). Maybe they do some shadow IT but the projects that they work on are not core to the business because they are locked out from those systems and the work that they do is seen as useless because it is never integrated (maybe their code kind of sucks because they don't get mentorship, etc). The core is mostly untouched by the social group(s) that surround it. The different social groups are not as rigid as departments but if the core has any legitimate power the non-complaint people are usually shuffled around. Some people in the "wrong-group" may learn to respect the existing culture and they are promoted into the sacrosanct. 2. Similar to #1 except that the newbies are better at self-marketing or socializing with management and eventually the core culture is entirely replaced by the newer culture. The business allows this, even perhaps risking business continuity, because they start to see the old clique as stubborn, not inclusive, not open to change or suggestions, perhaps even a liability to the company. This happens with open source projects as well

Lewton 3y ago

When I first joined, pg himself replied directly to me telling me to do better or post less lol