zlacker

[parent] [thread] 1 comments
1. jonnat+(OP)[view] [source] 2013-08-05 00:36:36
"because more pondered or technical articles take more time to get popular, they never reach the front page."

That's a really interesting point. As much as I've generally enjoyed the quality of front-pagers on HN over the years, I am now wondering about all the really good stuff that never made it there -- whether because the posters didn't optimize the timing properly, didn't game the headlines, or simply posted material that took awhile to digest and sink in.

Overall, there's probably a strong correlation between material that makes the front page and material that this community considers upworthy. But timing plays a huge role. I wish there was some way to counterbalance the effect a tiny bit. I can think of a few -- most of which would, unfortunately, be just as likely to harm as to help the reading experience.

replies(1): >>ricard+h2
2. ricard+h2[view] [source] 2013-08-05 01:27:10
>>jonnat+(OP)
I can remember quite a few recent product/tool launches that received just a couple upvotes, while I'm sure they would have been in the front page for a whole day just a year ago.
[go to top]