I can't think of too many things less hacker-like than "today we try very hard to be funny in a really formulaic way because that's what everybody else does".

I agree that there is such a thing as a lame, formulaic April Fool's story. So, let's raise the bar. Only upvote April Fool's stories that have an interesting twist to them. Don't upvote lame April Fool's submissions.

Speak for yourself. Clearly many people do find the jokes worthwhile or amusing, otherwise they wouldn't be voting for them. If you do not, then that's fine, but I don't see why this difference transcends the HN voting system more than any other.

I can understand how some might feel this is turning HN into reddit, but have a little faith - it's only for one day.

So, uhhh, did anyone play any jokes at MIT today?

If somebody actually pulls off a great MIT-style April Fool's hack, then a news story talking about it or an explanation of how they did it would be a great submission.

But there's nothing hack-like about unfunny people trying their hand at being The Onion. If that sort of story belong on HN, then I suggest that we also start voting up LOL cats since they use the clever hack of overlaying macro text on top of an image file.