Probably correct for what I know. But that doesn't means that all results here are valid.
The concentration of intelligence is obvious, but that doesn't mean I don't see sloppy reading and weird logic all the time.
Intelligent people also have biases, also read too fast and doesn't catch the nuances, also become hot headed etc etc.
It seems interesting that a community whose members overwhelmingly work in logical domains, also struggles being consistently logical on an aggregate basis.
And not just that, the abstract topic itself is...rather touchy.
Might there be something interesting to learn here?
Oh please. It's mostly just another tech forum.
It would be funny if people on HN programmed computers in the same way they talk outside of shop conversations.
The bar to become a member is low, and while comments are scrutinized and can be flagged, votes aren't.
And let me be honest: even I vote for or against topics that I wouldn't write for or against.
I think this is often observed in elections as well were people will give a secret vote to something they agree with even if they aren't ready to face their families about it.
FTR: I think the system tries to mitigate this to some degree. I don't think all votes are created equal here.
> Might there be something interesting to learn here?
Absolutely :-)
As it is on most any other site. And depending on who signs up and participates on which each site, you end up with some sort of an average intelligence level per site. HN's I suspect would be rather close to the top.
> and while comments are scrutinized and can be flagged, votes aren't.
Indeed they aren't, which is my point.
> I think this is often observed in elections as well were people will give a secret vote to something they agree with even if they aren't ready to face their families about it.
And one might expect the same to occur here, but does it, and to what degree? Is there more, less, or identical diversity of cultural/political beliefs in the general public, or on HN? Based on many years reading comments (particularly dimmed-due-to-downvotes ones, and responses to them) here, I have a feeling that there is less diversity of thought here.
Knowing such things with high levels of accuracy would require a form of omniscience, but that doesn't mean that nothing can be gleaned from user behavior on HN, or any sit for that matter.
>> Might there be something interesting to learn here?
> Absolutely :-)
What sorts of things do you think we could learn if one had access to the HN voting data?