zlacker

[return to "Ask HN: How to stave off decline of HN?"]
◧
1. tptace+o[view] [source] 2011-04-03 20:14:16
>>pg+(OP)
A hard ban on politics and current events, instead of the wiggly one we have in the site guidelines now.
◧◩
2. pg+h1[view] [source] 2011-04-03 20:24:46
>>tptace+o
The problem with that is that it's hard to say exactly what counts as politics. E.g. is an article about economic inequality like this one

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2402027

politics? I don't think so. Economic inequality is a very interesting social phenomenon, though it is often written about in a heated/political way.

◧◩◪
3. kwis+N1[view] [source] 2011-04-03 20:28:43
>>pg+h1
It's interesting, but is it useful for a busy founder?

Or to make that more concrete, would you forward that link to multiple portfolio CEOs and suggest they take time out of their day to read it and discuss it?

◧◩◪◨
4. mkr-hn+u2[view] [source] 2011-04-03 20:34:37
>>kwis+N1
I don't see a guideline saying something has to be useful or forwardable among CEOs.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. kwis+H3[view] [source] 2011-04-03 20:46:05
>>mkr-hn+u2
I'll go ahead and suggest, since it's on topic in this thread, that passive aggressive snark like this is one source of HN's decline.

One can disagree without being snarky and disagreeable.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. mkr-hn+24[view] [source] 2011-04-03 20:49:59
>>kwis+H3
How was it passive aggressive or snarky?
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. kwis+w6[view] [source] 2011-04-03 21:22:04
>>mkr-hn+24
Perhaps it was intended as a non-snarky, non-aggressive statement, but I still have trouble reading it as anything other than passive-aggressive snark, especially given the context of the conversation.

I find myself wishing I had a 'meh' flag for both your comment and my reply. Not quite a downvote or a report, but... "meh... this is not a useful addition to the conversation."

[go to top]