News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Poll: Should we ban TechCrunch? by RiderOfGiraffes on Monday May 25, 2009 @06:42AM (#625258)
Do you feel newbies are being misled? Isit not the case that older hands are sufficiently aware of TC's proclivities? Is it not enough simply to flag the contributions when they are clearly wrong, or down-mod stupid, irrelevant or content-free comments?

What would banning them add? Is it impossible that they might yet say something useful?

Re:Poll: Should we ban TechCrunch? by axod on Monday May 25, 2009 @06:45AM (#625260)
>> "Is it impossible that they might yet say something useful?"

I'm struggling to remember the last useful TC 'article'. Any example?

edit: It's quite hard to remember a TC article that didn't mention twitter also ;)

Maybe it'd be better to just create 2 front pages - one with everything, and one which removes some of the less useful gossip sites.

I agree with the OP - in the last few months TC seems to have descended into gossip and rumor.

Re:Poll: Should we ban TechCrunch? by quellhorst on Monday May 25, 2009 @06:58AM (#625277)
The last useful techcrunch article I recall was them covering the youtube website before anyone else.
Re:Poll: Should we ban TechCrunch? by alek on Monday May 25, 2009 @06:53AM (#625271)
You can't downvote submissions and TC is great at linkbait headlines, which get upvoted before people read the actual post. That's the problem.
Re:Poll: Should we ban TechCrunch? by pmjordan on Monday May 25, 2009 @07:08AM (#625288)
This suggestion may seem a little odd, but how about only enabling the up arrow once the URL has been visited? (via that javascript visited link colour trick, perhaps) It won't stop deliberate thoughtless upvoting, but nothing will.
Re:Poll: Should we ban TechCrunch? by RiderOfGiraffes on Monday May 25, 2009 @07:04AM (#625280)
You can flag submissions, you can learn not to up-mod something before you actually read it, and you always just not click on the link!

There's a parallel here with language choice. Some languages let you shoot yourself in the foot, and others try desperately to protect you. Newbies might need and benefit from the protection, power users often get frustrated at being prevented from doing things.

My principle is: when there's a balance to achieve, don't forbid things.

Re:Poll: Should we ban TechCrunch? by lucumo on Monday May 25, 2009 @07:58AM (#625337)
> you can learn not to up-mod something before you actually read it

Others would need to learn that.

Re:Poll: Should we ban TechCrunch? by ErrantX on Monday May 25, 2009 @07:48AM (#625325)
flagging doesn't guarantee removal though does it? Flagging an article IS a way to note you think it is wrong, or malicious etc. BUT it is a private thing.. there is no indication how many others agreed etc.

Perhaps adding the # of flags might be an option (or some indication)

Re:Poll: Should we ban TechCrunch? by axod on Monday May 25, 2009 @06:55AM (#625274)
Agreed. And you can't undo an upvote :(
Re:Poll: Should we ban TechCrunch? by aj on Monday May 25, 2009 @06:47AM (#625264)
Agreed. But how much does that benefit outweigh the obvious negative? And is the amount of bile being spewed by the TechCrunch writers good for the startup community?