zlacker

If an article adds significant new information, then sure. But riding on the coat-tails of the latest outrage doesn't count.

Don't forget that when any hot story hits the tech press, every outlet puts out one or more articles about it. That makes for dozens of posts. Throw in blogs and there are dozens more. If we didn't prune duplicates, copies, and me-toos, that's all the front page would consist of.

>>dang+(OP)
Seems like an awfully manual process...

>>dang+(OP)
So naturally, and not to be insensitive, but this rule goes out the window when someone famous dies? I've seen the front page of HN covered with stories about Steve Jobs death (amongst others)?

>>dang+(OP)
Also this policy forces a market reaction for faster stories. Rather than better, thought out, well written articles that come out later that may present the same information better. I hope those are taken into account.

>>akmill+Os1
That was already 3 years ago, and we've learned a lot about how to moderate HN since then. My guess is that some of those stories—the ones that contained some special information about Jobs, for example—would stay on the front page today, while others—such as the ones reporting info already reported elsewhere—would be demoted.

>>drawkb+oZ2
That's a great point. Better thought-out and written articles are always going to be welcome here. Those are not coat-tail stories, and the algorithms need not to identify them as such.