I felt that way at first, but then it occurred to me that all these "isn't relevant" vs. "is too" disagreements, taken together, are the emergent behavior of this community defining its own scope. There's a middle ground between small-and-specialized and ruined-like-digg-and-reddit, and nobody quite knows where it is. Or rather, everyone draws the lines somewhat differently, and so there's this period of zillions of micro-negotiations while a consensus works itself out.
Edit: changed "narrow" to "specialized" to avoid implying that small is bad.
I agree. Raising questions about appropriateness, complaining, and engaging in frank meta-discussion seem like healthy things, whether you agree with them or not. I also agree with downvoting the complaint if you disagree, though.
Think of a bunch of monkeys with ADD thoughtlessly firing cartridge after cartridge of snarky one-liners in the hope of winning some points from fans of snarky one-liners. Anything that is the opposite of that is probably a good thing.
I'm not sure about small, but a site definitely doesn't have to be narrow to not suck. Old Reddit wasn't narrow, and it lasted for some time. Where did this meme even come from?
I think it comes from the site's original scope being limited to startup news. But you're right - "narrow" has a pejorative connotation, and I didn't mean to imply suckage. Maybe "specialized" would be more precise (I'll revise it).
