There are a lot of people who don't understand what this place is for. Hacker News is a cocktail party. It's a bunch of smart people getting together and shooting the breeze about whatever we see on the front page. If you understand that, you'll fit in fine.
Lots of new users here don't understand that.
If you spend any time on the internet, you're quickly trained that discussion forums are places for combat. The goal is to look as smart as possible while tearing everybody else down. To have an unrefuted comment is to win, and nobody is going to let you do that so they'll tear your comment apart line by line. Naturally, that person is a moron and needs to be told so, preferably by turning his own trick against him and tearing his comment apart. Stop me if this sounds familiar.
That explains why the hardened slashdot veteran gets such a strange reception here. Have you ever been at a party where there was a guy who just didn't belong there? The belligerent know-it-all butting into conversations? The drunk guy in a room full of sober people? The uninvited casual racist? We've all seen what happens. People drift away from him wherever he goes, sometimes stranding some poor soul talking to him, but generally trying as best as possible to continue the party as normal and hoping he doesn't disrupt it further. Nobody wants to confront him and ask him to leave directly, but they all sure hope he'd get the hint on his own.
That's where we are here today. Except it's a big room and there are quite a few uninvited intruders behaving badly. You'll notice that that guy at the party often doesn't realize that he's out of place. Look through this very thread and you'll spot a few of him, justifying their belligerent behavior and complaining that the rest of us don't get it because this is The Internet and that's how we're supposed to behave.
But we don't behave that way. That's why it's so good here.
I'm sorry but this just doesn't ring true to me. HN is not a uniquely civilized forum, all same rules apply (are you really telling me people aren't trying to look smart around here?), the only difference is that PG founded it based on a set of principles carefully considered to combat the slashdot / digg / reddit culture as the site grew and seeded it with his fan base who naturally appreciate good conversation by definition given PGs essay style.
The problems facing HN today are not due to a few bad apples, to the contrary I think it's pretty clearly a function of size and there may be nothing to do about that short of pulling a Metafilter and charging for new accounts (something which brings its own form of elitism, but may be better than the alternatives).
HN has been often been likened to a mob, but that's not a good analogy either, because I believe 95% of HN is always in full-on critical thinking mode which is the opposite of mob mentality. It just feels like a mob because of the number of criticisms that you can be pelted with based purely on volume, each individual post tends not to be all that harsh, but the wall of text is overwhelming.
I tend to believe the biggest true problem of Hacker News is the nested comments.
Too easy to lose track, too hard to mantain a proper, nice conversation.
It's an amazing community, and we could be exchanging a lot of knowledge and experience, but usually we're just feeling hopelessly lost looking at the 70-something comments, most of them nested in all kinds of crazy levels.
I don't think collapsing comments is the perfect solution, but is better than nothing. I don't have an answer, I don't believe anyone has it ready. If anyone knew how to fix the way we talk to people over the internet, that person would be rich by now.
I agree. I'm often struck by how threads on HN, Reddit and Google+ about some topic go together and pick up on where past threads left off, or duplicate them unnecessarily. (brings to mind that David Byrne line "Say it once, why say it again?")
However, i wish to register the fact that i chuckled on seeing that the response to a comment arguing that shooting down someone's argument is not the HN way was a comment shooting it down!
A cocktail party is filled with smalltalk. I don't want that for HN. I wan't in depth discussion where I can learn something.
Removing all contrary points of view from a discussion makes it one-sided and turns it into smalltalk.
As hackers we should have an open mind and accept that there are opinions contrary to ours. We should embrace this fact and not stamp everyone who doesn't agree with our views as an 'intruder'.
Do a quick scan of the post you're replying to for the words "agree", "disagree", "contrary". You'll notice that the content of the discussion is never mentioned.
It's all about tone. Disagreement is central to conversation. Sadly, it's also central to being a dick, so you have to take care with how you come across. If you think of yourself standing with a beer in your hand looking a group of people in the eye, you'll probably do a lot better here than if you imagine you're on the Official Internet Review Board for Startup Execution pronouncing your verdict.
At no point does the parent advocate for smalltalk on HN or stamping out contrary opinion en bloc. The point is purely about behaviour, respect and being considerate of others.
As someone with a comment history that could be called combative I (unsurprisingly?) disagree.
I'm mostly a lurker. I check HN maybe once a day to see what people are thinking about in web tech / entrepreneurship circles. I comment maybe once a month, which is to say I have to think someone's really missing something important, or feel really strongly that something needs to be considered.
The emergent behavior of this is polarized: either strong arguments or technical corrections. Imagine you're having a loud discussion at a conference, with a stream of developers walking by. Who's going to stop and talk to you? I think it'll mostly be:
1. Someone who hears a rare misconception they've figured out the answer to
2. Someone who hears you're talking about a fringe technology they are also passionate about
3. Someone who wants to sell you something
(depending on who you are: 4. someone who recognizes you, and is excited to meet you in person)
If you're commenting on every article, I can maybe see how it would feel like it's "a few bad apples"... but I encourage you to count the number of people you consider "bad apples" -- they probably outnumber the regular commenters 10:1 or more. I think the "bad apples" are just people who don't usually comment, deciding their perspective on whatever is sufficiently valuable to the community that it's worth their time.
("feels important" is of course != "important" -- #include stories about airbnb screwing up)
Which is to say, when you put something on the HN homepage you're going to learn about: a ton of rare misconceptions you accidentally relied on, and a bunch of fringe technologies you should have been using / should have known exist. I think I can see why that might feel like being under Sauron's gaze... I just don't think it's malicious, and don't think those commenters are doing it wrong.
> If you spend any time on the internet, you're quickly trained that discussion forums are places for combat. The goal is to look as smart as possible while tearing everybody else down. To have an unrefuted comment is to win, and nobody is going to let you do that so they'll tear your comment apart line by line. Naturally, that person is a moron and needs to be told so, preferably by turning his own trick against him and tearing his comment apart.
A cocktail party is full of pretentiousness, and nobody there has anything of value to say. If this is HN, then take me back to the dive bar full of real people thank you...
I have been using a lot of forums and newsboards for more than a decade and only 1 exists today (except for HN) which is still enjoyable for me for exactly that reason you state in your comment.
These places will always be "noisy" but the noise ratio here is rather small. I don't know how HN managed this but I hope it is here to stay.
Lots of new users here don't understand that.
If you spend any time on the internet, you're quickly trained that discussion forums are places for combat. The goal is to look as smart as possible while tearing everybody else down. To have an unrefuted comment is to win, and nobody is going to let you do that so they'll tear your comment apart line by line. Naturally, that person is a moron and needs to be told so, preferably by turning his own trick against him and tearing his comment apart. Stop me if this sounds familiar.
That explains why the hardened slashdot veteran gets such a strange reception here. Have you ever been at a party where there was a guy who just didn't belong there? The belligerent know-it-all butting into conversations? The drunk guy in a room full of sober people? The uninvited casual racist? We've all seen what happens. People drift away from him wherever he goes, sometimes stranding some poor soul talking to him, but generally trying as best as possible to continue the party as normal and hoping he doesn't disrupt it further. Nobody wants to confront him and ask him to leave directly, but they all sure hope he'd get the hint on his own.
That's where we are here today. Except it's a big room and there are quite a few uninvited intruders behaving badly. You'll notice that that guy at the party often doesn't realize that he's out of place. Look through this very thread and you'll spot a few of him, justifying their belligerent behavior and complaining that the rest of us don't get it because this is The Internet and that's how we're supposed to behave.
But we don't behave that way. That's why it's so good here.