Re:Is the quality of HN posts declining?
by ggchappell on Monday October 11, 2010 @03:30PM
(#1780908)
[EDIT: Parent is dead. It was saying that the quality on HN had declined lately, and asking whether anyone agreed.]
This is an interesting comment, because I was just now thinking to myself about the unusually large number of really fascinating, informative, or thought-provoking posts that had appeared on HN lately.
Like the one about evaporative cooling in online communities.
And the one about autistic children and their lies.
And the one about getting rid of "Cancel" buttons.
And the one about ethics at HP.
And the one about not sacrificing partition tolerance.
And the one about saving local newspapers.
And "Memoirs of a Bullied Kid" and "Tomatoes and Election Season" and "New language Identified" and "JPEGs with Alpha Channels?" and ....
Now, none of these (except maybe the first, a little bit) is about startups. And certainly none of them mention angel investors. I consider the latter a terribly good thing, although I can imagine that many regulars here would disagree.
Re:Is the quality of HN posts declining?
by pringle on Monday October 11, 2010 @03:02PM
(#1780794)
Not till I read this post and the ensuing comments.
Snark aside, it would be helpful (and more interesting) if you at least elaborated on what you found displeasing, and perhaps even some ideas on how to improve it.
This is an interesting comment, because I was just now thinking to myself about the unusually large number of really fascinating, informative, or thought-provoking posts that had appeared on HN lately.
Like the one about evaporative cooling in online communities.
And the one about autistic children and their lies.
And the one about getting rid of "Cancel" buttons.
And the one about ethics at HP.
And the one about not sacrificing partition tolerance.
And the one about saving local newspapers.
And "Memoirs of a Bullied Kid" and "Tomatoes and Election Season" and "New language Identified" and "JPEGs with Alpha Channels?" and ....
Now, none of these (except maybe the first, a little bit) is about startups. And certainly none of them mention angel investors. I consider the latter a terribly good thing, although I can imagine that many regulars here would disagree.
Snark aside, it would be helpful (and more interesting) if you at least elaborated on what you found displeasing, and perhaps even some ideas on how to improve it.