
Another Way to View the "Decline" of HN - gsaines
http://www.georgesaines.com/
======
pg
I wish this were the whole reason. It may be why people are bored with the
stories on the frontpage; there doesn't seem much if any change in those. But
comments do actually seem worse. Though I still have hopes of reversing that
trend.

~~~
icey
HN used to feel like it was full of artists and now it feels like it's full of
critics.

~~~
techiferous
This. It seems that most often the top comment is a direct rebuttal to
whatever the original post was. While there is nothing wrong with this, and
it's actually healthy to have opposing points of view, it seems like the
community as a whole has gotten into a rut of criticizing everything. There
are other ways to have constructive discussions than always pointing out
what's wrong.

~~~
rimantas
There was a study somewhere stating that those criticizing are perceived as
being smarter. I guess we know that instinctively. And I think this applies to
self view to: when criticizing someone's else point we appear smarter to
ourselves.

------
spxdcz
My main problems with HN of late are twofold:

1) It seems to be becoming a blog aggregator for the X, Y and Z 'celebrities'
of HN. If I wanted to read all of their blog posts, I'd subscribe to their RSS
feeds. Do we really need EVERY one of their (sometimes good, sometimes
mediocre) posts showing up in the top 5?

2) There seems to be fewer practical posts aimed directly at helping start-ups
(which is what I loved about HN when I joined). If I look at the top 10 right
now, not one of the posts gives me any practical advice on building a web
business.

I'm not sure what the answer is, but unlike many here, I do feel it's about
the quality of the posts, not the comments (though the two are not separate).
Certainly, as the community grows, it is difficult to maintain the focused
niche that HN once had.

EDIT: Just to expand on that last point. I used to feel like I was 'hanging
out' with other people who were serious about building a meaningful web start-
up/business. As of late, my personal perception is of an increasing number of
frivolous side projects ("I built a 3D teapot in 30 seconds!") and
'cool/interesting' psycho-babble. To sum up, it's becoming less of a
professional resource for me.

~~~
spxdcz
I know it's really out of the question because of the amount of additional
load it would create, but in some ways I'd like to have a more personalised
home page. If I could just configure it with a:

-objective-c, -java, -hotz, -raises, -acquisition, -node.js, -drm -"considered harmful" (etc)

that would probably give me a 70% better home page.

~~~
jonburs
Are those the topics you're interested in or the ones that you don't want to
see? I'm not sure if your example uses command-line argument syntax or search
engine query syntax...

I do like the idea, btw. The difficulty most likely is accurately categorizing
articles. I know /. added tagging at some point but I'm not sure if that ended
up actually being useful.

------
zheng
I can't help but feel like the recent flurry of "HN is declining" is saying to
anyone who isn't part of the "old" crown that they are directly responsible
for making HN a worse site. I know I feel like since I've created an account,
its been all doom and gloom. I don't comment unless I feel that what I have to
say would add something to the discussion, but regardless of karma it seems
like the sentiment is that new users are dragging the site down.

I might be the only one who feels this way, but I doubt it. New users aren't
all bad, and I can't imagine that the purposed decline is all our fault,
either. However, the sentiment might be helping fuel the rate at which "bad"
users join. Someone who has surfed for awhile and is thinking about creating
an account is going to feel turned off for many of the same reasons why you
don't jump on a sinking ship[0], but the trolls, etc. won't care either way.
Just a thought.

[0] - I'm not implying that HN is in anyway a sinking ship, I derive a great
value from it.

~~~
jedsmith
You're not the only one that feels that way. Sadly, the elitism implied by
"wow, our community sucks _now_ " is overlooked by everyone practicing it.

~~~
jdp23
Indeed. Even when people bring it up :-)

------
qeorge
My suggestion: heavy handed moderation without apology.

For example, the joke comments with lots of votes piss me off. Were I pg, I'd
just delete them outright. If anyone noticed maybe they'd take the hint.

In other words: HN needs a benevolent dictator. "Democracies" on social news
sites don't work because the average person is boring.

~~~
rimantas
I don't get this frowning upon humor here on HN. It should be encouraged above
all, not made into outcast.

~~~
jasonkester
It's not that we're humorless. It's just that we've witnessed what happens in
communities where you jokes are encouraged in lieu of actual discussion.

Pull up a thread on programming.reddit.com or slashdot today and you'll find a
50 comment tangent devoted to silly puns. Often there will be four of those
tangents to scroll past before you can find discussion about the actual
article.

The quick and effective solution to this is to simply disallow silly, jokey
comments. As you'll note by reading a typical thread here, it works quite
well.

~~~
muyuu
You can just hide the thread (*in Reddit). For me that's ideal, since it keeps
these people busy when they could be adding noise. If they had something
worthy to contribute, they would in another thread.

ITOH, people participate in both silly puns and important discussions. It's
not good practice to downvote people who simply post stuff you're not in the
mood to read, or not interested.

------
thornjm
As someone who recently joined HN, I think it would be very reasonable for new
members to have lots of restrictions.

I won't pretend to understand the situation fully but I believe there is a
learning curve with any new community before new users fully understand it.

I understand there is already a number of karma milestones for features but I
think this system could be taken further to be even more beneficial.

\- Perhaps a new user can do nothing for the first 30 days or similar. \-
Followed by original comments only, no replies (except to own thread). \- Once
some karma is achieved, allow replies and up-voting and slowly increase their
abilities. \- Once they have significant karma allow them to make submissions,
this may stop lots of random submissions in the hope of quick karma.

In my opinion the greatest benefit from this is not in preventing new users
from participating, but in slowing them down long enough to understand and
respect the current community so they may participate in a constructive and
non disruptive way.

------
joe_the_user
I am actually surprised at how much the removal of karma from comments
affected my feelings about hacker news.

I like to imagine myself as pretty laid-back and uncompetitive but once
comments were removed, suddenly my motivation for posting and reading just
seemed to vanish.

Maybe that's a good thing. Perhaps it will produce fewer comments but ones
that people are more "honestly" motivated to make.

We shall see...

~~~
anateus
I think it gives the site a feel more like MetaFilter. Exactly as you say,
your impetus to post is stripped of the karma motivation, and becomes more
purely affected by actually wanting to make a contribution.

------
Kilimanjaro
Well, my tastes are not evolving or changing, I am still interested in using
primes for the background, or the latest hack with css transformations, or
going from 0 to 10k users in a week. They were my interests ten years ago as
they are today.

What I don't like is how larry page is already blundering, or facebook being
sued, or how the ipad2 is the new paperweight2 and you should wait for ipad4
with cornea display.

I second heavy handed moderation without apology, and score penalties for
every fault.

------
jwuphysics
I was once a huge contributor at deals.woot! After awhile, though, I started
to notice the decline in the quality of posts, as more and more users filtered
in. I remember being extremely annoyed by corporate accounts that spammed the
"fresh" page with worthless "deals". It seemed like deals.woot! was reaching
it's eternal September...

But new users might have also blamed the crappy atmosphere on me--that
bitching old guy with the superiority complex is everything that's wrong with
deals.woot! We need to get rid of people like him!

We know which side we're on. Deals.woot! went one way and I went the other. HN
is heading in one direction... and if you don't like it, I'm sorry to say that
you may not be able to change it.

Disclaimer: I just want to clarify that I am one of those stupid HN noobs.

------
jeswin
I am working on a startup which would benefit tremendously if there is a
breakthrough here. And I do spend time thinking about this quite often.

Some thoughts:

1\. Karma is a good indicator in smaller forums, but it doesn't scale with
increasing popularity. It becomes easier to game the system then.

2\. Qualifications (doctor, engineers, lawyers) on the other hand has worked
well enough in the real world.

So is it possible to replace Karma with Qualifications? But before that, how
would we define each? Karma is probably what we have now and needs no further
definition. Acquiring Qualification should require investment of time and
skill, which should be sufficient enough to keep mediocrity out; yet not
overwhelming enough to keep willing people out.

I still have no idea how to go about this, and my examples here are only my
vague ideas: \- What is the logical equivalent of an exam in programming?
Somehow quantify their contributions with code? Open Source? Ask people to do
something measurable on HN's code? \- For non-programmers, there will need to
be other ways of qualifying.

The words I have used here might smell bureaucracy; but can we take this idea
and simplify this?

[Edit: formatting, grammar, language]

~~~
Mz
The more you try to manipulate people, the worse the culture becomes. Karma
and such are technical solutions, which are tools and have their uses but the
problem here is one of culture, it is a people problem. And people problems
aren't readily resolved with technical solutions. One factor here is growth:
It has grown too fast to absorb new members at a rate which allows for
inculcation with the culture, so the culture is being damaged. Another is
"popularity": Comments are "worse" because you have a higher number/percentage
of people who are not as educated/savvy/cultured/whatever. Punishing people
for simply not being as well-developed won't develop them -- or, more
accurately, will develop them in exactly the wrong way and actively encourage
that which is reviled here.

I'm getting tired of howling into the wind and beating a dead horse. My
thoughts on such things are essentially ignored here while everyone who is
respected (mostly technical sorts, who all want a technical solution to a
people problem) rehashes how to manipulate the people with some new technical
solution. I only tossed this out in hopes it helps you with whatever startup
you are working on (and because it is 4:24am and I am suffering insomnia).

Peace.

~~~
roel_v
I don't think it's that people aren't interested in your ideas, it's just that
they are very obvious and don't offer a solution. The only possible solutions
tried so far are the technical ones, because that's the nature of the people.
If you have ideas on how to solve the problems you list in another way, that
would be a major breakthrough.

~~~
Mz
I do have ideas and it is a major breakthrough. And it likely won't get picked
up on because I'm too low on the totem pole.

I joined a forum a few years ago at a time when I was very ill, doped to the
gills and had major trouble "behaving" myself, so not at my best. It had been
around for a few years and the owner whined constantly that he wanted to
increase membership, especially international membership, and couldn't figure
out how. I was there six months and membership began going up dramatically,
especially international membership -- so much so that they eventually created
some subforums aimed at the international members. But I don't think anyone
really knew it was me that engineered it. I wasn't even a moderator at the
time. You don't have to be a moderator to treat other people well. In fact, it
probably helps in some ways if you aren't a moderator because then it is
simply an example of a decent human being, not a person with a duty to set the
example.

More recently, I joined a forum with 300 members and almost no discussion.
After I joined, people began talking to each other. Last I checked, it had
1800 members and has probably become the Go To place for its niche, likely
displacing a more long-standing group for that niche. Why? In part because I
got thrown out of the long-standing place. The fact is that in some ways,
where I am, that's where the action is. Except I'm not a hacker. I don't
expect to be all that influential on HN. I come here because I get to be
treated like a normal human being and people, oh, talk to me instead of
dividing up between those that worship me like a rock star and those that
desperately want to shoot me down and put me in my place. So I am content with
being a Nobody on HN and I have diabolical plans to remain a Noboby on HN so
that it can remain a decent social outlet for me instead becoming ruined for
me socially like every place where I ever became Somebody and then after
fostering discussion generally on the forum, I was the only person no one
would really talk to.

Still, I'm compulsively helpful, I tend to care, I have this unusual expertise
(or insight or some such) and it just annoys the crap out of me when I can't
give it away. Maybe some day I will come to my senses and stop caring about
others and just use it the way most socially insightful people seem to use
their skills: As manipulative ass-hats, for personal gain, because they know
something others don't know. But I'm not there yet.

Peace.

------
gord
I think github is where the action is - HN these days seems more about navel
gazing, posturing, karma chasing and down-vote wank-fests... and the result is
uniformity.

In contrast, the people who want to get-shit-done are changing the world on
github.

I do a technicolor yawn every time I see a post that talks about M$, Oracle or
Java.. as if those topics have any kind of future.

Likewise I cant comment on Node.js or Ill get down-voted cause some asshole
knows only the bad parts of javascript. [ I can say this with perspective, as
I was that asshole 4 years ago :]

PG, stop being so nice and enforce your single minded vision on HN before it
dies.

------
neilk
I think there's something to the premise of the article, although it's
depressing.

It suggests that communities don't grow together. They just gather a new set
of people in one place. Then the knowledge that's easy to disseminate, and of
interest to all, is distributed pretty quickly. And thereafter there's not
much to talk about. New information that's good for the forum is disseminated,
but only at the rate it is acquired, which is pretty slow.

Are there other directions, other ways to grow?

\- More specialized forums, different types of contributors and different
topics? (The Reddit way.)

\- Or, maybe the problem is that more structured data is needed to stimulate
deeper information exchange. Should there be common resources, like
TheFunded's database of investors, or point by point evaluations of
programming frameworks? (The Wikipedia way.)

~~~
jcr
Neil, the main article has a link to the "Evaporative Cooling of Group
Beliefs" article by Eliezer_Yudkowsky [1]. Considering your post, I believe
you will really enjoy it.

[1]
[http://lesswrong.com/lw/lr/evaporative_cooling_of_group_beli...](http://lesswrong.com/lw/lr/evaporative_cooling_of_group_beliefs/)

------
MiguelHudnandez
While reading the article, I thought of another example of the described
perspective. When reading one's own code from months or years ago, it can seem
disappointing.

A friend mentioned to me earlier that this is likely a result of personal
growth rather than a persistent state of confusion and bad coding. At least
it's a nicer way to think of it.

------
firebones
When communities get bored, they turn on themselves (and turn meta). Some of
the best flurries of interest on HN have arisen from innovation inside or
surrounding the platform. It would seem that the better hack is to create more
positives (and shift the community's attention to generative extensions of the
platform) rather than to simply focus on mitigation and removal of negatives
(such as deterring mediocre comments).

Almost all of the focus has been on filtering (true to Shirky's "publish, then
filter" mantra), but perhaps equal or greater time should be spent extending
the platform and enabling the community to create stronger signal. Karma is
always the default attempt, but karmic schemes invariably reach a point where
the negatives equal the positives. As the community shifts in personality, the
currency of karma changes (500 points earned a few years ago is not the same
as 500 points earned in the last few months). It's a different currency now,
perhaps even a devalued currency.

An incentive for quality might be something closer to the highlighting of
outstanding comments--the Best of Reddit approach--handed out not in a
democratic way, but by a selected group of users who represent the kind of
community we want. Karma goes private and perhaps is used only as a way of
identifying future candidates for handing out highlighted contributions. This
recognition is a kind of currency that could be better controlled and perhaps
would be more valued.

------
stewbrew
In the case of a social news site like hn, the external factors have changed
though. People now use such web sites for marketing purposes. So, they don't
post a site to hn because they think hn readers could profit from it but
primarily because they expect profits from visits by hn readers. (Since hn is
about startups, this probably isn't that surprising and I'm most likely not
telling you anything new. :-)

I think posting an article should have some "costs" or somehow "hurt" posters.
They should be rewarded for posting an article if hn readers like it.

------
BrandonM
I've recently seen complaints about the lack of practical startup advice posts
like there used to be. I think this submission highlights the nature of
learning and how it ties into our satisfaction with Hacker News.

I think it's inevitable that we join in a flurry of excitement, learn a lot of
new things, lose motivation (for whatever reason), and eventually use Hacker
News as a way to pass time instead of working. What it comes down to is: How
many practical posts do we need? After you've been here long enough, you know
enough to _fucking build something._

I definitely know enough, and I still haven't done it. I don't know why. I'm
certainly not blaming Hacker News for not having good enough articles.

Just a few weeks ago I was giving my parents advice on their small business,
and at some point in the conversation I realized, "Holy shit, I really have
learned a lot more on Hacker News than I realized. It wasn't all just a
highbrow waste of time."

I think that a lot of us internalize many of the lessons we learn here rather
quickly, and it's not long before it begins to look like a repetitious echo
chamber.

Eventually it's time to stop being a consumer of HN and be a producer. Write
that app that you can "Show HN," write that blog post that has a new insight,
be that example that defines a successful alternative lifestyle, leverage what
you've learned here, and get on with life.

I think a lot of us just need to stop _whining_ and start _doing_.

------
seto28
As the community increases in size, it's normal for this 'decline' to appear.
I believe rather than focus on tweaking karma points or moderation is to
introduce list functionality ala twitter so people can create their own HN
within HN, as they see fit. As newer HNers start contributing, they can be
tracked and eventually added to lists so it doesn't stagnate. Doing this will
ensure old-timers will be happy while the community gets bigger and the
quality 'declines' relative to x years ago.

~~~
kissickas
That sounds exactly like Reddits, which in my opinion are necessary to make
Reddit tolerable, so I don't think it would be a bad idea here. Maybe having a
finite number could work, too, as opposed to allowing any user to create
sections.

------
foca
The guys at c2 have already figured this one out:
<http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?CommunityLifeCycle>

Also, if you're into how communities work and why how they
succeed/fail/implode, you should definitely look at Meatball wiki:
<http://meatballwiki.org/wiki/>

------
elliottcarlson
Personally, I think the only thing hurting HN is this constant talk about the
decline of HN. It's all I see in comments and now on the front page. If
anything is hurting this site, it's the constant complaining. Get over it
people - if you don't like it, move on or learn to deal with it - in the end
you aren't going to find a community as good as this one.

------
jamesbritt
I still think HN rocks.

I do get a little annoyed at the recycling of links from recent years (e.g.
SICP book/videos, Yegge post #n,) that get greeted as some amazing new
discovery, but fuck it, some things are always going to be new and amazing for
a new crop of people. Yeah for people finding new and amazing stuff.

Are comments getting worse? Don't know. Might be that, over time, you start to
notice certain things more, no doubt through some personal bias filter (e.g.
comments praising Python, Apple, or Sinatra are almost automatic up votes,
while even questioning those things means almost automatic down votes) but,
again, fuck it, because there are still a good number of kick-ass comments.

Really, overall, especially compared to some other communities, HN has done
really well in keeping up the quality discussion. Could it be better?
Probably, but not worth _too_ worked up over. Lots better things to discuss.

------
petar
This article, one in a series of articles complaining about HN's decreasing
quality, continues to reinforce two beliefs of mine:

(1) A new, better designed version of HN is needed, and (2) A design that does
not "water down" from the perspective of EVERY reader MUST be based on
reader's choices which will result in different users seeing different things
(people don't have the same tastes, and these tastes evolve).

I have a very concrete proposal of how this should be done:

    
    
      http://popalg.org/curated-by-choice-part-1
    

What I don't know is this: If I were to implement the above news website, how
would it take off the ground at first. Give me a convincing story and I will
do it.

------
w1ntermute
Ironically, the topmost article in the screenshot in his blog post[0] was
lauded as "the perfect Hacker News article" in the most upvoted comment.

0: <http://hackerne.ws/item?id=2419347>

------
JonnieCache
I'd just like to register my vote in favor of a regime of fascist moderation.

------
thekevan
This is the best take I have read on the "decline" of HN.

------
ignifero
I won't quit until there is a better alternative. It seems that ultimately
it's the popularity of any aggregator that becomes its doom. Maybe stories run
too fast so it becomes pointless to comment, or it is because everyone who
disagrees seems to be buried. I suppose some other hackers will come up with
something better? Anyone have any suggestions?

