←back to thread

600 points codetrotter | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
subsubzero ◴[] No.35461974[source]
Congrats Dang, you have done a wonderful job so far and moderate one of the most fantastic online communities out there. I am sure most of the job feels somewhat thankless but I want to let you know I(and many many other users on this site) appreciate your hard work and dedication.
replies(3): >>35462601 #>>35462773 #>>35463700 #
codeddesign ◴[] No.35462773[source]
If by “finest” you mean a Reddit mob mentality for tech, then yes I completely agree with this statement.
replies(6): >>35462836 #>>35463131 #>>35463193 #>>35463875 #>>35464427 #>>35464999 #
dang ◴[] No.35463131[source]
What do you think we could do differently? Serious question.

I don't like the mob thing either but it's how large group dynamics on the internet work (by default). We try to mitigate it where we can but there's not a lot of knowledge about how to do that.

replies(24): >>35463179 #>>35463213 #>>35463257 #>>35463371 #>>35463548 #>>35463713 #>>35463749 #>>35464099 #>>35464410 #>>35464467 #>>35464570 #>>35464688 #>>35464754 #>>35465446 #>>35465523 #>>35465648 #>>35465794 #>>35466615 #>>35466946 #>>35467134 #>>35468675 #>>35469283 #>>35476621 #>>35488228 #
yCombLinks ◴[] No.35463213[source]
Downweight posts and comments based on the frequency and positive sentiment. IE things that are posted often and with high positive comments should bubble to the top less often.
replies(1): >>35463250 #
dang ◴[] No.35463250[source]
Other people want us to downweight negative sentiment. I wonder what happens if you downweight all the sentiments.
replies(4): >>35463297 #>>35463513 #>>35463663 #>>35476323 #
mochomocha ◴[] No.35463663[source]
Do you have a simple AB testing system in place to test hypotheses like this? If you're the only sherif in town running experiments, it doesn't take much work to build a simple one, probably around ~100 LOC ("do things that don't scale").
replies(1): >>35463676 #
dang ◴[] No.35463676[source]
We don't. I know it sounds simple but I'm too tired.

Edit: to expand a bit lest that seem snarky - what I mean is that maintaining the current system takes so much energy that there's precious little capacity left over for creative exploration. This is a problem.

replies(2): >>35464083 #>>35464772 #
1. saagarjha ◴[] No.35464772[source]
Have you looked into expanding the team? (I’m guessing the answer is yes: if so, how has it gone?)
replies(1): >>35464877 #
2. dang ◴[] No.35464877[source]
Yes but it's complicated. Mostly by me.