I miss forums. They were a better format for debate IMO.
HN is one of my favorite places on the internet - the themes, the people and the tone are really cool. But the ephemeral nature of posts is not good for discussing ideas. Threads for debating ideas in depth should last forever, as they did in forums.
I wish HN launched a forum feature, or that someone built something in parallel and they saw a massive influx from the HN community.
If someone has ideas on how to pull this off I’d be happy to contribute - I can design and code full-stack. My requirement to hop on board would be that we somehow manage to tie it to the HN values, themes and audience - I wouldn’t be so interested in an ex-novo community-building exercise.
Maybe we could start with some structured discovery work, gathering opinions from existing HN users - we know where to find them! - and take it from there.
HN is my go to also, but the reality is there are lots of intelligent yet stubborn people here that refuse to be wrong or take criticism.
One of the best ways to learn about ourselves and the world is through knowing that we actually know very little
I agree with the sentiment, sometimes people in HN - myself included - are very hot-headed. Discussion is not always positive. It’s one of the reasons I’ve built a public profile - I found that sometimes I too get caught in negative dynamics, and want to experiment how being non-anon affects me.
As a rebuttal to your point though:
- All debate, from Socrates to this part, is bound to be heated and messy by nature.
- HN discussion is some of the very best I’ve experienced on the net. Like I said, the ethos, themes and people are great. Discussions ranging from OCaml, to startup financing, to befriending crows? Dope. The CEO of Stripe dropping in to comment? Dope.
- The permanence of a forum would mitigate some of the issues you point out (though not all - forums have never been impervious to mean or hot-headed users)
Yeah HN can get testy too. Especially, in the recent past, when it comes to discussing management, RTO etc.
Its understandable to a degree. Most here are probably NOT the primary reason why management needs to be around but still it can often be like Reddit that way.
I have mulled over going public with my account because i agree with you, its easy to flame to just act a fool under the guise of anonymity when you generally know it may be hard to get to you in the real world, just how discussion doesnt devolve so quickly as often in public. BUT there are too many crazies out there that are more than willing to take a simple disagreement of opinion to crazy heights that I don't see the risk/rewards.
As I have gotten older though, I have gotten better about recognizing when someone is simply dug in or flaming, especially in the first reply or two and simply dis-engage. Not always, we all have our bad days, but I try to be better about it.
Also, i noticed your account is new, but im not sure if you are new here. But wanted to add this, as it can help facilitate discussion
All debate, from Socrates to this part, is bound to be heated and messy by nature.
Strongly disagree on that. In an academic environment, I regularly observe and participate in exacting debates that remain cool-headed and civil. Now, the ability to do this takes effort to develop, but incivility in debate is just a mark of laziness and immaturity.
I am not in academia so I cannot say, but I have observed plenty of controversy from the outside and have seen other commenters in HN express their disillusionment on academic debate.
Regardless I’m not proposing that HN or analogous platforms should be 4chan.
It’s good to aspire to orderly and rigorous debate, but I don’t think that hyper-regulation is good either. We humans are messy, and there’s good things about that, too. It’s a matter of degree.
I think this is key for why forums were great. You have a single thread for a discussion topic / post, so anyone getting defensive, flaming, or trolling gets lost in the thread as people reply to highly quality posts in the thread.
Forums were great. I miss them greatly. Not only were they better for debate, but they fostered a sense of community. They were welcome to discussion and collaboration and experimentation. People could learn from each other and form lasting bonds. Everything on sites like Reddit is too ephemeral and anonymous.
Forums also let you choose the level of anonymity you wanted, and other people to choose the level of trust that they had in you. I think this feature came from the simplicity of having a purely chronological timeline of posts on a given topic.
Once you have Facebook-style mandates or recommendation algorithms and voting mechanisms (like Youtube and Reddit), that goes out the window. Now, people look for and find the "popular" perspective or the algorithmically-favored perspective instead. By removing the work from the process, they have turned off the critical thinking that was involved.
Comments
I miss forums. They were a better format for debate IMO.
HN is one of my favorite places on the internet - the themes, the people and the tone are really cool. But the ephemeral nature of posts is not good for discussing ideas. Threads for debating ideas in depth should last forever, as they did in forums.
I wish HN launched a forum feature, or that someone built something in parallel and they saw a massive influx from the HN community.
If someone has ideas on how to pull this off I’d be happy to contribute - I can design and code full-stack. My requirement to hop on board would be that we somehow manage to tie it to the HN values, themes and audience - I wouldn’t be so interested in an ex-novo community-building exercise.
Maybe we could start with some structured discovery work, gathering opinions from existing HN users - we know where to find them! - and take it from there.
HN is my go to also, but the reality is there are lots of intelligent yet stubborn people here that refuse to be wrong or take criticism. One of the best ways to learn about ourselves and the world is through knowing that we actually know very little
I agree with the sentiment, sometimes people in HN - myself included - are very hot-headed. Discussion is not always positive. It’s one of the reasons I’ve built a public profile - I found that sometimes I too get caught in negative dynamics, and want to experiment how being non-anon affects me.
As a rebuttal to your point though:
- All debate, from Socrates to this part, is bound to be heated and messy by nature.
- HN discussion is some of the very best I’ve experienced on the net. Like I said, the ethos, themes and people are great. Discussions ranging from OCaml, to startup financing, to befriending crows? Dope. The CEO of Stripe dropping in to comment? Dope.
- The permanence of a forum would mitigate some of the issues you point out (though not all - forums have never been impervious to mean or hot-headed users)
Yeah HN can get testy too. Especially, in the recent past, when it comes to discussing management, RTO etc.
Its understandable to a degree. Most here are probably NOT the primary reason why management needs to be around but still it can often be like Reddit that way.
I have mulled over going public with my account because i agree with you, its easy to flame to just act a fool under the guise of anonymity when you generally know it may be hard to get to you in the real world, just how discussion doesnt devolve so quickly as often in public. BUT there are too many crazies out there that are more than willing to take a simple disagreement of opinion to crazy heights that I don't see the risk/rewards.
As I have gotten older though, I have gotten better about recognizing when someone is simply dug in or flaming, especially in the first reply or two and simply dis-engage. Not always, we all have our bad days, but I try to be better about it.
Also, i noticed your account is new, but im not sure if you are new here. But wanted to add this, as it can help facilitate discussion
http://www.hnreplies.com/
Strongly disagree on that. In an academic environment, I regularly observe and participate in exacting debates that remain cool-headed and civil. Now, the ability to do this takes effort to develop, but incivility in debate is just a mark of laziness and immaturity.
I am not in academia so I cannot say, but I have observed plenty of controversy from the outside and have seen other commenters in HN express their disillusionment on academic debate.
Regardless I’m not proposing that HN or analogous platforms should be 4chan.
It’s good to aspire to orderly and rigorous debate, but I don’t think that hyper-regulation is good either. We humans are messy, and there’s good things about that, too. It’s a matter of degree.
I think this is key for why forums were great. You have a single thread for a discussion topic / post, so anyone getting defensive, flaming, or trolling gets lost in the thread as people reply to highly quality posts in the thread.
Otherwise known as “people”. And you’re one of them you just don’t realize it.
Forums were great. I miss them greatly. Not only were they better for debate, but they fostered a sense of community. They were welcome to discussion and collaboration and experimentation. People could learn from each other and form lasting bonds. Everything on sites like Reddit is too ephemeral and anonymous.
Forums also let you choose the level of anonymity you wanted, and other people to choose the level of trust that they had in you. I think this feature came from the simplicity of having a purely chronological timeline of posts on a given topic.
Once you have Facebook-style mandates or recommendation algorithms and voting mechanisms (like Youtube and Reddit), that goes out the window. Now, people look for and find the "popular" perspective or the algorithmically-favored perspective instead. By removing the work from the process, they have turned off the critical thinking that was involved.