3 ms·

From experience, any features requested to facilitate or hamper existing behaviors usually fail and get reverted or go unimplemented. Some examples from the pas

by yan 17y ago

From experience, any features requested to facilitate or hamper existing behaviors usually fail and get reverted or go unimplemented. Some examples from the past are marking high-karma users and removing visible karma. I'd say, just let HN run its course and it'll figure itself out. The more policy and rules you try to add the more soul you take away from it.

stingraycharles 17y ago
I'd say, just let HN run its course and it'll figure itself out. The more policy and rules you try to add the more soul you take away from it. The problem is, when you let social network sites "figure itself out", the end result is, in my not so humble opinion, usually an emotional, harsh and perhaps childish community. Maybe HN has the advantage of being connected to YCombinator, and thus has a reduced risk of this happening, but the risk is still there. Besides, there are elements of HN that do manipulate the community to make it what it is: for example, not being able to downvote posts until a certain karma level has been reached (thus focusing on the positive rather than the negative). Personally, and I think I speak for more people in this community, the existence of HN is a huge relief considering the state of today's online communities. It would be a waste if the nature of HN would be lost due to a lack of foresight in controlling this very nature.
- unalone 17y ago
  I support this initiative to split sites. It seems overcomplex, but we need to try something to evolve the site and ease its growing pains. Maybe HN has the advantage of being connected to YCombinator, and thus has a reduced risk of this happening, but the risk is still there. It's already happened. Even in tech discussions, we've got a whole shitload of snark even when it comes to mild topics. Topics with even a little drama, like the 37signals discussion over accepting VC, lead to people acting like high schoolers. I'm 19, and I read some of the comments people're leaving here, and I want to tell them to grow up. That's a really, really, really bad sign for a community, when adults are acting like n00bs. When it comes to off-topic stuff, I realize each and every time that the majority of people here don't know what the hell they're saying. When people start talking about relationships, or drug use, or politics, whatever, most comments are inane and wrong. Look at the Nobel conversation right now. People are going nuts and dissing the committee at every chance they can get, calling it a disgrace, etc., because apparently they've never looked at the Nobel prize before. They're also assuming that the gut reactions of people hours after an announcement determine how a political game is going to be played. It's frighteningly immature, assuming these people are all allowed to vote based on their shallow opinions. Every week I grow more and more disgusted with this community. I stick around because the few dozen voices that are smart are really worth having discussions with, and I love still being able to discuss certain topics and learn from people who know more than I do, but I'm starting to agree with the general rest-of-the-Internet consensus that people here have their heads stuck deep up their asses. Every time I defend this place somewhere I realize I don't believe what I'm saying. I'd like to fix that, because there are precious few places left to jump from here.
  - req2 17y ago
    Relationships and politics aren't the best examples - even the "experts" on all of these topics fail to demonstrate that they actually know what they're saying. Even in topics like psychological research or evolutionary biology, people are willing to spout forth uninformed crap because they prefer their own "years of experience completing projects in the trenches against her psych lab any day." Dunning-Kruger is in full effect on HN, and it's a great argument for a liberal education. The depth of the ignorance and resistance to modern science here is somewhat shocking.

by yan 17y ago

stingraycharles 17y ago

I'd say, just let HN run its course and it'll figure itself out. The more policy and rules you try to add the more soul you take away from it. The problem is, when you let social network sites "figure itself out", the end result is, in my not so humble opinion, usually an emotional, harsh and perhaps childish community. Maybe HN has the advantage of being connected to YCombinator, and thus has a reduced risk of this happening, but the risk is still there. Besides, there are elements of HN that do manipulate the community to make it what it is: for example, not being able to downvote posts until a certain karma level has been reached (thus focusing on the positive rather than the negative). Personally, and I think I speak for more people in this community, the existence of HN is a huge relief considering the state of today's online communities. It would be a waste if the nature of HN would be lost due to a lack of foresight in controlling this very nature.

unalone 17y ago
I support this initiative to split sites. It seems overcomplex, but we need to try something to evolve the site and ease its growing pains. Maybe HN has the advantage of being connected to YCombinator, and thus has a reduced risk of this happening, but the risk is still there. It's already happened. Even in tech discussions, we've got a whole shitload of snark even when it comes to mild topics. Topics with even a little drama, like the 37signals discussion over accepting VC, lead to people acting like high schoolers. I'm 19, and I read some of the comments people're leaving here, and I want to tell them to grow up. That's a really, really, really bad sign for a community, when adults are acting like n00bs. When it comes to off-topic stuff, I realize each and every time that the majority of people here don't know what the hell they're saying. When people start talking about relationships, or drug use, or politics, whatever, most comments are inane and wrong. Look at the Nobel conversation right now. People are going nuts and dissing the committee at every chance they can get, calling it a disgrace, etc., because apparently they've never looked at the Nobel prize before. They're also assuming that the gut reactions of people hours after an announcement determine how a political game is going to be played. It's frighteningly immature, assuming these people are all allowed to vote based on their shallow opinions. Every week I grow more and more disgusted with this community. I stick around because the few dozen voices that are smart are really worth having discussions with, and I love still being able to discuss certain topics and learn from people who know more than I do, but I'm starting to agree with the general rest-of-the-Internet consensus that people here have their heads stuck deep up their asses. Every time I defend this place somewhere I realize I don't believe what I'm saying. I'd like to fix that, because there are precious few places left to jump from here.
- req2 17y ago
  Relationships and politics aren't the best examples - even the "experts" on all of these topics fail to demonstrate that they actually know what they're saying. Even in topics like psychological research or evolutionary biology, people are willing to spout forth uninformed crap because they prefer their own "years of experience completing projects in the trenches against her psych lab any day." Dunning-Kruger is in full effect on HN, and it's a great argument for a liberal education. The depth of the ignorance and resistance to modern science here is somewhat shocking.