Re:Poll: Should we ban TechCrunch?
by raganwald on Monday May 25, 2009 @07:27AM
(#625305)
I see a lot of comments discussing the quality of TC's scurrilous writing. May I suggest you ignore that? TC itself is almost irrelevant to the question of banning. Even if it is false, linkbaiting dreck. Instead of considering the quality of the links, try looking at the quality of HN discussions about those links.
Do HN discussions add insight and interest? Do they raise or lower the quality of discourse here?
Some discussions devolve very quickly into name-calling, negativity, and mindlessness. Some elevate into insightful observations and positive debate. Look at the discussions and think about whether HN should encourage or discourage them.
My thought is that if TC discussions on HN are positive, there should be no ban regardless of the quality of the links. But if there is a preponderance of negative discussions around its links, it may be in HN's interests to simply walk away without any further ado.
Do HN discussions add insight and interest? Do they raise or lower the quality of discourse here?
Some discussions devolve very quickly into name-calling, negativity, and mindlessness. Some elevate into insightful observations and positive debate. Look at the discussions and think about whether HN should encourage or discourage them.
My thought is that if TC discussions on HN are positive, there should be no ban regardless of the quality of the links. But if there is a preponderance of negative discussions around its links, it may be in HN's interests to simply walk away without any further ado.