3 ms·

the influx of new people and the change (loss?) of culture are at such odds with me desire for inclusiveness and internal (personal) regulation, or free will.

• TrevorJ 18y ago
  The point I would ask you to consider then is that a focused topic, even if it is as broad as "Hacker News" will necessarily exclude certain other topics and as a corollary it will exclude or discourage certain types of behaviors. Because I do have a free will, if I have the desire to behave in a certain way, and it's at odds with the goal of HN, I can choose to use any number of other outlets for my communication, or even create my own avenues. The counter intuitive truth is that if all of the social news sites where 100% inclusive in terms of content and were 100% homogenized (that is to say, the culture's of those sites fully exhibited all forms of communication/topics) then that would actually inhibit free will because nobody would have any choices in terms of what type of content they wanted to interact with: everyone would be subject to the same exact atmosphere with no viable alternative.
  • diN0bot 18y ago
    i meant inclusive within the bounds of hn's goals. there are still sub communities; eg: dev hackers, startup idea folks. no one is necessarily wrong in their interpretation of hn's community and submission policy. sometimes it is not that the level of comments has gone down but that the amount of comments has gone up. this is bad for the morale of commenter, to say nothing of the time readers waste (since without collapsible threads...). maybe after 20 comments no one should be able to comment. i'm not advocating homogeneity so much as customized views. as the community grows it becomes harder to be a part of it. there's a social quality i'm trying to explain...and a concern for how exclusion is implemented... but i've spent far too much time on hn today as it is, so i'll let it rest.
    • TrevorJ 18y ago
      Ah, yes I do see the distinction you are making after clarifying.