Yes and no. Rule #1 for starting a community - and starting is not the same as later - is to establish a strong and tight knit core.* That's more important than trying to appeal to _everyone_. Is that elitist? Or smart?

Religious beliefs aside (read: it's simply an example), look at Christianity. One guy and twelve disciples. I'm not a preacher but I don't think Jesus was elitist :)

* The same can be said of product. That is, established a core audience. Establish fit. Evolve from there.

Elitism and differentiation aren't the same, and in particular the latter doesn't imply the former (and likewise for elitism and exclusivity). You are right about exclusivity and differentiation being effective strategies and gave good examples for how they are useful.

I am usually impressed by the ability of folks on HN to disagree while keeping the conversation civil & interesting, especially when compared with other platforms. That said, I suspect that the demographics that frequent HN represent a pretty narrow slice of humanity, and like any subculture this narrow slice of humanity is subject cultural whims and various ugly forms of groupthink and gaps in perspective that any culture on Earth is. That's specifically what rubs me the wrong way about your previous comment about "civil facts-based conversation" (and framing of people on other platforms as "riff raff").

Fair play. Riff raff was a quick lazy choice. That said, one trip to Yahoo Answers - or whatever it was called - or similar and riff raff might be too kind. :)

Maybe we describe others as "less thorough and more emotional"?

To your point about HN, there's definitely - at least on some topics - a very narrow view; plenty of group think. Plenty of times, I've been down voted for not staying in line. Not for being wrong, or adversarial, etc. But for not thinking with the group.

If you view it from the perspective of people who watched Slashdot fall apart, it seems a lot less elitist and more pragmatic about SNR.