← Back to context

Comment by tptacek

12 years ago

A bad comment is a bad comment whether I write it or a green-named user does. Jerkface.

This is why I think the anonymous idea above is a good add-on, if we have to have this system.

The number of bad comment is relatively low. And what kind of bad comments are we after?

  • Wow do I ever disagree with that. Comments on HN have gotten genuinely awful.

    • I hear you express this sentiment often. Could you explain your thoughts on this?

      If anything, I think the stories are the problem. Cool hacks and interesting science often fail to get the 2-3 upvotes they need to escape the new page. On page 2 of "New", I've found the following fairly decent stories that died recently: http://simplystatistics.org/2014/03/20/the-8020-rule-of-stat... http://googlecloudplatform.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/cassandra-...

      Yet both of these are vastly more useful than Julie Horvath's "omfg, I had a workplace conflict" or "Yay basic income, no facts, no reasoning, yay" (currently 380 pts, 441 comments, was #1 for a while today).

      I'd suggest that it's far more important to improve the stories than to improve the comments. The comments on a story like "JDK 8 Release Notes" or "Circuit Breaker" (about a distributed computing design pattern) are actually quite good.

      2 replies →

um ... ok. But the thing is I don't think this necessary so I would like some way for the echo chamber to not hold. Obviously, the ideal would be to not have the restriction. :)