3 ms·

I think it speaks mostly about the state of the "new" section. Submitting a worthwhile article is a very fickle undertaking, skewed by timezones and the fact th

I think it speaks mostly about the state of the "new" section. Submitting a worthwhile article is a very fickle undertaking, skewed by timezones and the fact that few people visit the section, or remember to upvote after reading a long article. I could imagine a variant of the endorsement system for submissions, where you can endorse users and have their submitted stories automatically get your vote. But that seems rather open to gaming.

Houshalter 13y ago
I thought someone collected data and found that timezones don't matter too much (times where fewer people are reading also have fewer other submissions to compete with.) It doesn't seem like many people visit the news feed at all. Personally I imagine the most important features are picking a popular article that multiple people will try to submit (each new submission upvotes the original article instead) and maybe people who have friends with HN accounts. The title probably also makes a large difference. Some people have suggested improvements to HN's sorting algorithm which would favor more "exploration" than relying on people to go through the new section.[1] [1] http://www.bayesianwitch.com/blog/2013/why_hn_shouldnt_use_randomized_algorithms.html http://www.bayesianwitch.com/blog/2013/why_hn_shouldnt_use_r...
- nkurz 13y ago
  It doesn't seem like many people visit the news feed at all. Yes, and thus the rare souls that venture there have a ridiculously disproportionate impact on what gets the front page. Almost makes you wonder if it would make sense to keep access to the 'new' page as a special privilege for experienced and trusted users. Or at least hide it behind some tiny text link so those newbies don't ruin the party!
  - tunap 13y ago
    I upvoted a story on the new feed about the Inmarsat's approach to estimating the missing Malaysian plane's location that I found highly informative. Hours later that day when I noted the usual Telegraph mc-article rising up, not a single upvote on the better article(IMO) had been recorded. Perhaps it was a time delay as there is 1 upvote now. Shame, it seemed like the perfect article to elicit meaningful discussion on HN. Maybe Part 2 or Part 3 will someday...if they're proven correct, which is up for debate still. HN post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7430634 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7430634 DirectLink http://www.airtrafficmanagement.net/2014/03/mh370-satcoms-101/ http://www.airtrafficmanagement.net/2014/03/mh370-satcoms-10...
    - kbenson 13y ago
      I find that a comment as well as an upvote helps more. I'm more likely to check out a new article that has a comment, as there may be some discussion to be had, and I find the discussion the best part of the site.
      - tunap 13y ago
        Good point. I bookmarked that one due to length and had to revisit it later when time allowed. I checked back to see how it's HN status fared and read some additional insights, the discussions often add new perspectives or are more substantive than the articles themselves. Checking the HN comments to ensure I don't inadvertently benefit a click-baiter is very useful, too.
  - tim333 13y ago
    One issue I think is that if there are two articles, one brilliant and one so so but with a catchy title they may both get one or two up votes so there is no way to tell at a glance which is the outstanding one. A possible way around that would be on the new stuff to have some way to vote as to the quality - say a score out of 10 or buttons reading 'so so' 'really interesting' and the like. They could make a tag pop up saying 'interesting' or similar but not actually effect the ranking on the page which would work on vote count as it does at the moment. I just mentioned that because I'm working on building a similar voting system myself as a kind of holiday project.
    - krapp 13y ago
      Maybe articles could have links to "similar" articles, or if you post a link which is similar, you're asked if you want to comment in the existing thread instead?

Houshalter 13y ago

I thought someone collected data and found that timezones don't matter too much (times where fewer people are reading also have fewer other submissions to compete with.) It doesn't seem like many people visit the news feed at all. Personally I imagine the most important features are picking a popular article that multiple people will try to submit (each new submission upvotes the original article instead) and maybe people who have friends with HN accounts. The title probably also makes a large difference. Some people have suggested improvements to HN's sorting algorithm which would favor more "exploration" than relying on people to go through the new section.[1] [1] http://www.bayesianwitch.com/blog/2013/why_hn_shouldnt_use_randomized_algorithms.html http://www.bayesianwitch.com/blog/2013/why_hn_shouldnt_use_r...

nkurz 13y ago
It doesn't seem like many people visit the news feed at all. Yes, and thus the rare souls that venture there have a ridiculously disproportionate impact on what gets the front page. Almost makes you wonder if it would make sense to keep access to the 'new' page as a special privilege for experienced and trusted users. Or at least hide it behind some tiny text link so those newbies don't ruin the party!
- tunap 13y ago
  I upvoted a story on the new feed about the Inmarsat's approach to estimating the missing Malaysian plane's location that I found highly informative. Hours later that day when I noted the usual Telegraph mc-article rising up, not a single upvote on the better article(IMO) had been recorded. Perhaps it was a time delay as there is 1 upvote now. Shame, it seemed like the perfect article to elicit meaningful discussion on HN. Maybe Part 2 or Part 3 will someday...if they're proven correct, which is up for debate still. HN post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7430634 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7430634 DirectLink http://www.airtrafficmanagement.net/2014/03/mh370-satcoms-101/ http://www.airtrafficmanagement.net/2014/03/mh370-satcoms-10...
  - kbenson 13y ago
    I find that a comment as well as an upvote helps more. I'm more likely to check out a new article that has a comment, as there may be some discussion to be had, and I find the discussion the best part of the site.
    - tunap 13y ago
      Good point. I bookmarked that one due to length and had to revisit it later when time allowed. I checked back to see how it's HN status fared and read some additional insights, the discussions often add new perspectives or are more substantive than the articles themselves. Checking the HN comments to ensure I don't inadvertently benefit a click-baiter is very useful, too.
- tim333 13y ago
  One issue I think is that if there are two articles, one brilliant and one so so but with a catchy title they may both get one or two up votes so there is no way to tell at a glance which is the outstanding one. A possible way around that would be on the new stuff to have some way to vote as to the quality - say a score out of 10 or buttons reading 'so so' 'really interesting' and the like. They could make a tag pop up saying 'interesting' or similar but not actually effect the ranking on the page which would work on vote count as it does at the moment. I just mentioned that because I'm working on building a similar voting system myself as a kind of holiday project.
  - krapp 13y ago
    Maybe articles could have links to "similar" articles, or if you post a link which is similar, you're asked if you want to comment in the existing thread instead?