Sensationalism, over the top?
10 comments
Though there may be too many stories about Yahoo, there's a simpler explanation for the average submitter who's bummed because his stuff didn't get a lot of votes: it wasn't as interesting to everyone else as it was to him.
I don't see what you mean about disappearing within seconds of submission, though. The 30th story on the new page is currently 5 hours old. That gives submissions plenty of time to get voted up.
I don't see what you mean about disappearing within seconds of submission, though. The 30th story on the new page is currently 5 hours old. That gives submissions plenty of time to get voted up.
I just read through the whole submission and replies. I woke up with a feeling of dread because I remembered that I posted something (and not what that something was) to HN last night after having a few drinks at my friend's going away party. Yikes...
With that admission, and in a completely sober state this time, I would rephrase the question. First, I apologize for the over-the-top remarks in the original submission completely.
Since it sparked some discussion on improving HN though, at least it wasn't a complete waste. Obviously I do think HN is an amazing resource already and I'll be here for a long time to come hopefully :) I also do understand some stories (esp. ones about exciting happenings at bigger companies, which all were once startups) get votes and are interesting to HN readers including myself. I totally followed the Yahoo/MS stuff as well, like a moth to a flame :)
As a discussion forum or a resource someone can turn to for access to the startup community though, HN as it stands is a news site and not a forum. The news-style voting efficiently filters for hackers who have little time to be sifting themselves, and a few false-positives being missed is worth it. But I think there's an opportunity to improve the utility of HN as a community and make it even more useful for founders and would-be founders.
I don't think adding a forum is the right approach, because that eliminates the filter, which is undesirable. But if you add a section for 'Ask' style posts, you'll keep the voting and you've essentially got a forum with a filter.
If the site keeps growing, which it seems you're actively trying to control (I remember recent discussion about removing HN from some search engines), adding a few other sections might help too. But limiting growth is good, and multiple sections may enable an explosion of growth in content and so in types of readers (as opposed to just founders and would-be founders).
Whatever the current algorithm is, it did bury my last post within seconds. I had my partner vote on it right away as well, but we literally went page after page and gave up after about 10 pages of clicking 'Next' and didn't see it anywhere about 10 seconds after submitting it. So it seems like it never had a chance, and it may be that new submissions are being too aggressively filtered in the current algorithm...
Anyway, I better go set my workstation password to something I can't type if I've had a few drinks ;)
With that admission, and in a completely sober state this time, I would rephrase the question. First, I apologize for the over-the-top remarks in the original submission completely.
Since it sparked some discussion on improving HN though, at least it wasn't a complete waste. Obviously I do think HN is an amazing resource already and I'll be here for a long time to come hopefully :) I also do understand some stories (esp. ones about exciting happenings at bigger companies, which all were once startups) get votes and are interesting to HN readers including myself. I totally followed the Yahoo/MS stuff as well, like a moth to a flame :)
As a discussion forum or a resource someone can turn to for access to the startup community though, HN as it stands is a news site and not a forum. The news-style voting efficiently filters for hackers who have little time to be sifting themselves, and a few false-positives being missed is worth it. But I think there's an opportunity to improve the utility of HN as a community and make it even more useful for founders and would-be founders.
I don't think adding a forum is the right approach, because that eliminates the filter, which is undesirable. But if you add a section for 'Ask' style posts, you'll keep the voting and you've essentially got a forum with a filter.
If the site keeps growing, which it seems you're actively trying to control (I remember recent discussion about removing HN from some search engines), adding a few other sections might help too. But limiting growth is good, and multiple sections may enable an explosion of growth in content and so in types of readers (as opposed to just founders and would-be founders).
Whatever the current algorithm is, it did bury my last post within seconds. I had my partner vote on it right away as well, but we literally went page after page and gave up after about 10 pages of clicking 'Next' and didn't see it anywhere about 10 seconds after submitting it. So it seems like it never had a chance, and it may be that new submissions are being too aggressively filtered in the current algorithm...
Anyway, I better go set my workstation password to something I can't type if I've had a few drinks ;)
The current ranking scheme is such that just after submitting a story that it only lives a few seconds on the front page, meaning that luck plays a big part in if it ever gets its first upvote, and whether or not anyone notices it at all. And for those of us that primarily browse via the RSS feed, most stories never make it there.
Perhaps a side-bar on the front page listing the most recently submitted articles would be nice so that they at least creep into the peripheral vision of those visiting the front page.
I've started making a point to dig through the "new" page to upvote where appropriate, but I suspect most readers don't bother.
Perhaps a side-bar on the front page listing the most recently submitted articles would be nice so that they at least creep into the peripheral vision of those visiting the front page.
I've started making a point to dig through the "new" page to upvote where appropriate, but I suspect most readers don't bother.
The current ranking scheme is such that just after submitting a story that it only lives a few seconds on the front page
Not even a few seconds. A brand new story is only visible on the new page.
Not even a few seconds. A brand new story is only visible on the new page.
I think pg is right that the problem isn't the algorithm, but people's interests. I do share lux's dissatisfaction with what everybody else likes, though.
Here's what interests me most:
I'm especially disinterested in abstract language/framework wars that aren't tied to any particular application. I never feel like I've learned anything from those discussions. I would be interested in a specific example of how language X worked well for doing Y.
If somebody would keep up with the new page and comment on every story about things startups have actually done, I would follow their comments and vote up those stories.
Here's what interests me most:
1. Things startups have actually done to improve their product or service.
2. Things startups have actually done to understand customers better.
3. Things startups have actually done to increase market share.
I'm especially disinterested in abstract language/framework wars that aren't tied to any particular application. I never feel like I've learned anything from those discussions. I would be interested in a specific example of how language X worked well for doing Y.
If somebody would keep up with the new page and comment on every story about things startups have actually done, I would follow their comments and vote up those stories.
Not everyone finds the same questions interesting or useful.
I found only two submissions from you, both 10 or 11 days old, so the current mix of news on the front page isn't really relevant. In one case, as rms notes, the question would've been better posed to an accountant. In the other case, you never bothered joining in on the discussion, which is a good way to kill a thread.
I definitely don't think there's cause for saying that HN has a glut of 'generic reddit-style stories', or that the discussion here is reducing itself to 'the intellectual tedium of sensationalist media', just because the two questions you posed didn't get any traction at the time. I would expect that the archetypal successful entrepreneur wouldn't give up and cry foul quite so quickly.
I found only two submissions from you, both 10 or 11 days old, so the current mix of news on the front page isn't really relevant. In one case, as rms notes, the question would've been better posed to an accountant. In the other case, you never bothered joining in on the discussion, which is a good way to kill a thread.
I definitely don't think there's cause for saying that HN has a glut of 'generic reddit-style stories', or that the discussion here is reducing itself to 'the intellectual tedium of sensationalist media', just because the two questions you posed didn't get any traction at the time. I would expect that the archetypal successful entrepreneur wouldn't give up and cry foul quite so quickly.
Keep in mind that the mainstream media has mostly ignored and/or misunderstood the Yahoo/Microsoft story. We are much better than the mainstream media. Have you watched TV lately?
This is something that is very interesting to the majority of the audience here, even if it is distracting from actually creating a startup. There is nothing you can do to stop this discussion. We are discussing one of the biggest things to happen in the history of Big Internet. Ask more interesting questions if you want to engage the community, hackers are not interested in accounting questions. Ask your accountant.
This is something that is very interesting to the majority of the audience here, even if it is distracting from actually creating a startup. There is nothing you can do to stop this discussion. We are discussing one of the biggest things to happen in the history of Big Internet. Ask more interesting questions if you want to engage the community, hackers are not interested in accounting questions. Ask your accountant.
When I played basketball in High School, we spent a lot of time talking about the NBA.
I think these stories are of interest because hopefully, some of you will be sitting there with your own deal from MS in your hands someday, or with scaling issues of your own due to the incredible popularity of your site. Hopefully, at those points the insight regarding Yahoo and Twitter will become extremely relevant.
It is my observation that the time of day (when you make your submission) is very important. I have seen many a good link lost in a flood of (in my opinion) dross. At quieter times new posts pause for sufficient time to attract some attention - you need the first two or three votes to get to the lower ranks of the front page and thus come to a wider audience.
Someone (pg ?) makes a "Hacker News 2" portal up and running. Seriously, I've seen this kind of stuff happen a couple of times before and it always works fine. There is a need for something that cannot be solved in any other way : less traffic.
From what I've seen before, this works like a charm. Everybody keeps up visiting the main site, but the few that needs more focus start to feed the second portal. Interesting stories of the second portal will get into the main one, adding value to submissions. Win-Win.
Remember the early days of HN ? There is a need for this kind of environment that disappeared when HN got popular. So make a second portal running, announce it, and it'll take off slowly effortlessly.
From what I've seen before, this works like a charm. Everybody keeps up visiting the main site, but the few that needs more focus start to feed the second portal. Interesting stories of the second portal will get into the main one, adding value to submissions. Win-Win.
Remember the early days of HN ? There is a need for this kind of environment that disappeared when HN got popular. So make a second portal running, announce it, and it'll take off slowly effortlessly.
Gah, it's not like DHH invented the concept of profitability!! It annoys me every time someone mentions they're being profitable "DHH-style". I enjoyed his speech too, but you don't need to pay royalties to DHH.
How about splitting things up into 2 sections?
"ASK" type comments, which are pretty much a forum. And a separate reddit news type thing.
It seems like if these 2 things were separated, then what are essentially forum posts, would have a better chance of a response.
"ASK" type comments, which are pretty much a forum. And a separate reddit news type thing.
It seems like if these 2 things were separated, then what are essentially forum posts, would have a better chance of a response.
I am strongly in favor of the segmentation of this site but PG has said that he intends to make one site that is the best list of links for hackers, not one segmented site with different lists.
Sure, but IMHO forum posts (ASK YC:) etc, are not really links. They're forum posts - I'm not sure of the value added by lumping them in with news stories/links/articles. By doing this, the forum posts don't seem to get the attention they actually deserve.
Personally I think separating it and having a specific forum for startup topics would really improve things.
Personally I think separating it and having a specific forum for startup topics would really improve things.
You're right. Good stuff is constantly being buried.
Resubmit it. Tweak the headline somehow. Say something like, "Really need some help..." or "Ask YC: How do you handle..." I, for one, would be glad to help if I can.
This board is like a "mini startup world" in itself (although much more sympathetic). Things go wrong. Things aren't fair. The world isn't quite ready. Don't complain. Do something about it. Consider it practice for when things really get unfair.
Resubmit it. Tweak the headline somehow. Say something like, "Really need some help..." or "Ask YC: How do you handle..." I, for one, would be glad to help if I can.
This board is like a "mini startup world" in itself (although much more sympathetic). Things go wrong. Things aren't fair. The world isn't quite ready. Don't complain. Do something about it. Consider it practice for when things really get unfair.
We're starting a startup that will be profitable very quickly (a la David Heinemeier Hansson's Startup School speech) due to a dual subscription and content licensing model, but we've submitted a couple stories to YC/HN recently, which were almost immediately buried. We really would appreciate help/feedback from others, and we can't see why the insight from this community wouldn't be valuable for others as well. But my submission today didn't make the homepage or even within 160+ submissions of the home page within 2-3 seconds. We were almost instantly reduced to worthless in the submission list, since we disappeared within seconds of submission...
Are we missing a step, or could the HN algorithm stand to be tweaked to improve relevance for startups as opposed to generic reddit-style stories? If these types of stories are deliberately killed, then that leads to questions about the usefulness of the whole YC experience, since avoiding questions at such a low level really doesn't instill confidence at higher ones. Although I've read PG's Hacker's and Painters, I'd like to see more out of the HN community if we're going to call it a communal success...