I'm sorry if I gave the wrong impression- I'm glad to see the site expand, and I think it's great that you're coming ;)
I just want to preserve exactly that signal to noise ratio that makes the site attractive to both of us - The comments in particular suffer when people don't try to maintain a good front.
You're absolutely right that Social Networking may not be the best way to do that- My contention is that digital identities are inexpensive; They don't require substantial investment to maintain, so it's easy to turn abusive.
For example, say for whatever reason, I chose to be acerbic and taunting to people on the forum, rather than engaging the larger community.
It would be trivial for me to create a new username, do things which are destructive to the idea of a community of interest.. It's not just outright trolling, but I might reply to comments sarcastically, and attack people when they "Ask HN" on something I think is somewhat obvious.
The harm to myself would be minuscule- In this example, I've substantially diminish the enjoyment of other people, and might even do so for months or years under the same username.. But when I'm ready to move on with my life, I discard the username I created for HN, and no one is the wiser.
I haven't left any trace that people might find when googling my name. Essentially, I've made myself dispensable.
If I were applying for the YC program, I'd not want to do that, for fear that PG et all would reject my application, but if I'm visiting, and this account is in no way linked to me, what incentive do I have, other than common decency?
Sadly, I think that common decency does not get us very far.
You might want to take a look at the article I linked at the bottom of my post, on creating online communities.
I think that it does a very decent job at giving a general overview, but it doesn't yet account for way inexpensive digital identities allow people to behave in an uncivil manner.
Again, welcome to the site, and I hope I haven't scared you away ;)
"what incentive do I have, other than common decency?"
It's a shame that 'common decency' has to be enforced in some way.
I post under a screen name (obviously), and while my real name is in my profile now, even before it was I never felt the urge to push someone else's buttons just for the fun of it. I realize I'm being a bit optimistic when I say this, but I think people rise to the standard to which they are held.
We have a bit of a reputation here at HN for being stodgy and humorless. While I don't think that is true, I'm fine with that reputation if it means newcomers think twice before posting their witty one liners and meme-of-the-week. Eventually the culture initiates the newcomers and they don't have to think twice... they will know what the community values and what it does not, and they will contribute accordingly.
In short, I don't think we need any technical solution to solve what someone's innate desire to be valuable will accomplish for us. What we do need is for existing members to set the tone, and so far they have done so admirably.
"I think people rise to the standard to which they are held."
Perhaps you're right- An extension of the Broken Windows theory, if you will. But so far it might seem that evidence is against you.
Look back, not just at HN, but Reddit, Digg, Kuro5hin, and even Slashdot have people who say how nice it was before the trolls arrived, before the site became as popular.
I certainly don't want to come across as a wistful elderly man looking back with nostalgia at his youth- I think that there's more to it than hazy memories of the past.
Communities evolve and change- I love Reddit, and my Alien Bobblehead is amoung my prized possessions.. But at the same time, I know that the level of discourse has fallen sharply over the few years. Pun threads are common, and people attack one another frequently.
I once read someone mention the "4chanization" of reddit, and unfortunately, I worry that that is the natural state of all communities, if they aren't tended.
The level of discourse on HN, while still exemplary has been declining of late, and I've seen more personal attacks and discussions of identity politics.
I wish I had your optimism, Andrew, and I hope you're right.
Yeah I'm familiar with the history as well, I was just saying that I think those other sites were not conscious of the need to set a good example for newcomers, and HN mostly is. We have had these self-examination threads almost monthly since we first appeared on TC.
I think setting a good example will cause people to rise to it, and I think being conscious of setting a good example means we will preserve our community values. No one on Reddit or Digg was clamoring to "maintain the level of discourse"... their '4chanization' happened because those communities had no immune response. Here, we have a powerful social response, in that most people set a good example and gently correct those that don't.
Thanks e1ven - don't worry I don't scare that easily :-)
I don't know whether this helps at all, but I "read" HN for months through the RSS feed - so in a way I was not on HN at all, if HN is defined by reading the commentary and/or upvoting. But it was enough to give the vibe of the site, by the nature of the stories posted. Eventually I read something where I thought something like "Does whoever submitted this actually believe this ?!" and came back here to see the comments. I was pleasantly surprised by the S/N, so either it was not the kind of thread that was worrying you or you guys must have been intellectual saints before all the plebs showed up :-)
The point is that whether you realise this or not there are already two tiers of access to HN (full site and read-only). So you could chose to enforce some kind of social pressure on commentators (either through real identity or as another person has said through an invite system - I have seen the latter work well in other contexts) while still not turning HN into a private Y-combinator club.
It comes down to as to whether you folks feel that the essence of HN lies in the story selection or the commentary.
Obviously I don't have an opinion on that.
I hadn't considered the difference between just reading site site, and actively commenting- Admittedly, I myself don't comment as much as I ought to.
I certainly don't want to turn HN in a Y-combinator club- They rejected my application almost 2 year ago, after all ;)
"It comes down to as to whether you folks feel that the essence of HN lies in the story selection or the commentary."
I think this is the point PG and I disagree on a bit- His approach is to focus on moderation of the stories, and increasing their focus, where as I'm more concerned with the tone and caliber of discussion.
It's his site, so he gets to win that one ;) Hopefully community pressure can help to keep things inline- Past experience suggests that doing more is likely necessary.
I've offered my proposal for comments and had it rejected, but hopefully the discussion may help him (and us, collectively) find a solution that works better.
Comments
Glad to have you, Frossie!
I'm sorry if I gave the wrong impression- I'm glad to see the site expand, and I think it's great that you're coming ;)
I just want to preserve exactly that signal to noise ratio that makes the site attractive to both of us - The comments in particular suffer when people don't try to maintain a good front.
You're absolutely right that Social Networking may not be the best way to do that- My contention is that digital identities are inexpensive; They don't require substantial investment to maintain, so it's easy to turn abusive.
For example, say for whatever reason, I chose to be acerbic and taunting to people on the forum, rather than engaging the larger community.
It would be trivial for me to create a new username, do things which are destructive to the idea of a community of interest.. It's not just outright trolling, but I might reply to comments sarcastically, and attack people when they "Ask HN" on something I think is somewhat obvious.
The harm to myself would be minuscule- In this example, I've substantially diminish the enjoyment of other people, and might even do so for months or years under the same username.. But when I'm ready to move on with my life, I discard the username I created for HN, and no one is the wiser.
I haven't left any trace that people might find when googling my name. Essentially, I've made myself dispensable.
If I were applying for the YC program, I'd not want to do that, for fear that PG et all would reject my application, but if I'm visiting, and this account is in no way linked to me, what incentive do I have, other than common decency?
Sadly, I think that common decency does not get us very far.
You might want to take a look at the article I linked at the bottom of my post, on creating online communities.
http://www.alistapart.com/articles/identitymatters
I think that it does a very decent job at giving a general overview, but it doesn't yet account for way inexpensive digital identities allow people to behave in an uncivil manner.
Again, welcome to the site, and I hope I haven't scared you away ;)
"what incentive do I have, other than common decency?"
It's a shame that 'common decency' has to be enforced in some way.
I post under a screen name (obviously), and while my real name is in my profile now, even before it was I never felt the urge to push someone else's buttons just for the fun of it. I realize I'm being a bit optimistic when I say this, but I think people rise to the standard to which they are held.
We have a bit of a reputation here at HN for being stodgy and humorless. While I don't think that is true, I'm fine with that reputation if it means newcomers think twice before posting their witty one liners and meme-of-the-week. Eventually the culture initiates the newcomers and they don't have to think twice... they will know what the community values and what it does not, and they will contribute accordingly.
In short, I don't think we need any technical solution to solve what someone's innate desire to be valuable will accomplish for us. What we do need is for existing members to set the tone, and so far they have done so admirably.
"I think people rise to the standard to which they are held."
Perhaps you're right- An extension of the Broken Windows theory, if you will. But so far it might seem that evidence is against you.
Look back, not just at HN, but Reddit, Digg, Kuro5hin, and even Slashdot have people who say how nice it was before the trolls arrived, before the site became as popular.
I certainly don't want to come across as a wistful elderly man looking back with nostalgia at his youth- I think that there's more to it than hazy memories of the past.
Communities evolve and change- I love Reddit, and my Alien Bobblehead is amoung my prized possessions.. But at the same time, I know that the level of discourse has fallen sharply over the few years. Pun threads are common, and people attack one another frequently.
I once read someone mention the "4chanization" of reddit, and unfortunately, I worry that that is the natural state of all communities, if they aren't tended.
The level of discourse on HN, while still exemplary has been declining of late, and I've seen more personal attacks and discussions of identity politics.
I wish I had your optimism, Andrew, and I hope you're right.
Yeah I'm familiar with the history as well, I was just saying that I think those other sites were not conscious of the need to set a good example for newcomers, and HN mostly is. We have had these self-examination threads almost monthly since we first appeared on TC.
I think setting a good example will cause people to rise to it, and I think being conscious of setting a good example means we will preserve our community values. No one on Reddit or Digg was clamoring to "maintain the level of discourse"... their '4chanization' happened because those communities had no immune response. Here, we have a powerful social response, in that most people set a good example and gently correct those that don't.
Thanks e1ven - don't worry I don't scare that easily :-)
I don't know whether this helps at all, but I "read" HN for months through the RSS feed - so in a way I was not on HN at all, if HN is defined by reading the commentary and/or upvoting. But it was enough to give the vibe of the site, by the nature of the stories posted. Eventually I read something where I thought something like "Does whoever submitted this actually believe this ?!" and came back here to see the comments. I was pleasantly surprised by the S/N, so either it was not the kind of thread that was worrying you or you guys must have been intellectual saints before all the plebs showed up :-)
The point is that whether you realise this or not there are already two tiers of access to HN (full site and read-only). So you could chose to enforce some kind of social pressure on commentators (either through real identity or as another person has said through an invite system - I have seen the latter work well in other contexts) while still not turning HN into a private Y-combinator club.
It comes down to as to whether you folks feel that the essence of HN lies in the story selection or the commentary. Obviously I don't have an opinion on that.
I hadn't considered the difference between just reading site site, and actively commenting- Admittedly, I myself don't comment as much as I ought to.
I certainly don't want to turn HN in a Y-combinator club- They rejected my application almost 2 year ago, after all ;)
"It comes down to as to whether you folks feel that the essence of HN lies in the story selection or the commentary."
I think this is the point PG and I disagree on a bit- His approach is to focus on moderation of the stories, and increasing their focus, where as I'm more concerned with the tone and caliber of discussion.
It's his site, so he gets to win that one ;) Hopefully community pressure can help to keep things inline- Past experience suggests that doing more is likely necessary.
I've offered my proposal for comments and had it rejected, but hopefully the discussion may help him (and us, collectively) find a solution that works better.