Challenge HN: Keep lame April Fools' gags off the front page
Most April Fools' gags in tech are lame. Only the very best ones, such as those that show hackery ingenuity, deserve much attention on HN. I propose that we, or rather you, flag the others off the front page.
After plodding through them much of March 31 (where I am), I realized I was dreading the next 24 hours of having to read so many lame stories and decide which are real. Then I thought it might turn into a positive if I appealed to you all instead. This is a plea! You don't have to do it, but in my view it will help.
A word about humorlessness, since it's bound to come up. People who complain about HN's humorlessness have a point, but not because we're against humor. We like laughing as much as anyone. It's because empirically, a culture of humor means a flood of lame humor, and HN's goal is to optimize for signal/noise ratio. As with any optimization, there are inevitably tradeoffs.
101 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 185 ms ] threadSo... challenge failed before it even started <3
About the only thing I'll miss, is for the more impressive ones, technical explanations. But beyond that, it's nice to have a place to breathe.
I see HN as a community, not a trove of tech and business documentation/explanations. The proper place for communal documentation is a wiki, not a forum. I mean, it's one day that the entire Anglo culture knows about, not just techies. You can gird your loins for one day, and have weeks in preparation for it.
Personally, I can do without the obituaries when someone famous dies. The single-to-noise ratio is so incredibly low - there's a small amount of discussion of what the person did (repeated so many times), and a whole lot of 'oh, sad to see they died'. But hey, if I wait, the whole thing will blow over in a day or two, no need to complain, nor pre-emptively get defensive about being the 'obituary police'. I mean, after all, when someone famous in tech dies, you've got Twitter, TechCrunch, and Reddit to supply you.
Good hunting!
I wish you were right, but I'm afraid you have an overly rosy view of upvotes. For example, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7506762 shot to #1 in just a few minutes.
HN is the place where you discuss things like "Whatsapp bought for $19 BILLION". So by nature, some of the headlines we get on here are a little hard to believe in the first place... throw in April Fools jokes, then we have people questioning if they are reading a real PR piece, or a "joke".
Or you have gotten older.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7500889
Imagine the front page being filled by 2048 clones every day.
Then imagine it being filled like this every two days instead.
Then imagine it's not just the front page, but the entire internet being filled with those clones every two days.
Then imagine it's not every two days, but every year.
It's gotten stale.
http://blog.ycombinator.com/meet-the-people-taking-over-hack...
I've been keeping a close eye on this. What swayed me was how many more April Fools' posts were appearing on March 31 (where I am) than I previously remember.
I do appreciate that not everyone agrees, but I want to send a message about signal/noise ratio. That's HN's mantra. We can't have that and everything else as well; there are tradeoffs.
The objection that this and other meta posts I've been making are also noise is a good one, except that this is a special case while we go through a transitional period. I won't be making them forever.
I sure wish it were true that the community is already optimizing for signal/noise ratio, but it's not. We have a serious problem with that and we're going to try a lot of things to fix it.
You have a valid question, and I've thought about this a lot. When you have a very large audience it's depressingly easy to have lots and lots of quick upvotes for something that's genuinely content-free. There are plenty of places on the interwebs where you can find amusing material, but it feels to me that there is a real danger of the intellectually challenging and enriching material being swamped as we "amuse ourselves to death."
I don't think this is a case of telling people what to enjoy, it's more a case of trying to keep the original flavor and culture. HN is certainly an unusual corner of the 'net, and I value it.
Added in edit: And you can't actually downvote posts, you can only flag them. Unless I'm missing something, or possibly haven't hit the karma threshold yet. Which seems unlikely.
Given my observation and the circumstance that you have posted the original post in the middle of April Fools' Day over the globe, I thought your post was quite inappropriate and it would challenge trolls instead, hence the flagging (as a substitute for downvote). I appreciate your concern and thank you for your service, but please keep it mind that not only moderators are concerning.
I'm afraid I don't understand your second paragraph.
I'm not sure I can rephrase the second paragraph better and the following analogy fits well, but I think the principle of "do not feed trolls" equally applies here. Every moderator post about the current matter signals trolls, which we want to avoid as much as possible (and we have hellbans for the reason). In my humble opinion it would be better to deliver the statistics or even small notice well before and/or after the April Fools' Day for asking communities' help and coordination.
But, of course, there are a lot of lame jokes. Just like there are a lot of lame news articles that could potentially be posted on the site but are not upvoted.
So why don't we optimise the SNR, and only upvote good April Fools pranks?
I think that's a good compromise.
Traditionally, 'April Fools' pranks were one morning at the start of April, and the gags ended at midday.
It's never worked properly on the internet and has bled either side to something like 2 days, internet time. That's a non-significant amount of time as a proportion of the year to have to deal with bogus shit.
I admire companies that make up pranks. I really wish the megacorp I work for would have the guts to break the monotony once a year too.
I have faith in the voting system that all but the good'uns will be filtered out anyway. I respectfully suggest that this post is noise itself.
Your faith in the voting system is misplaced, I'm afraid. Upvotes alone don't keep HN HN.
But I've posted what feels like ten zillion comments in this thread, not to mention plastering the whole site with them lately. I'm going to stop here.
I will absolutely flag anything close to "We're being acquired by [competitor]!!1!" or "Announcing [thing totally antithetical to everything we do]!" etc.
Or you could just use gender-neutral language in the first place, if you're concerned about being inclusive. "you folks", "my colleagues", even just "you". There's a host of alternatives. It scans weirdly that you highlight that the phrase might be taken the wrong way, but then choose to explain it rather than alter it.
Edit: re 'enough?', this isn't meant to be a crushing, accusative comment, but advice for better expression in the future.
If you are smart enough to recognise that your choice of language is not ideal, it would be better to change it rather than try to justify it.
Agree strongly with jwise0's well-crafted comment: the justification makes it worse. You recognise that this is a gendered word, which a group of people might be uncomfortable with, and yet you indicate that you are deliberately using it.
I'm not offended by the comment, nor do I have trouble understanding it. It's just odd to express inclusiveness by highlighting and justifying a term rather than adjusting it.
"You folks" sounds corny. No one says "folks", in my experience, other than corporate managers in emails.
It's hard for me not to write in an alive way, which means using informalities when they feel like the mot juste. Actually, I'm dreading the prospect of having to strip all possible misunderstandings out of my writing in advance. It feels like going to language jail. But I understand why people do it and why I may have to. I hope that anyone who cares about this noticed that I did replace "you guys" with "you all" above.
Edit: When I said "all possible misunderstandings", I wasn't talking about inclusivity—I meant literally all possible misunderstandings about anything.
I did the same thing myself with my general assumption that all online authors are 'he' until otherwise noted, with the excuse that it eased the 'he/she' usage issue. That annoyed the living shit out of me, as it was really an excuse for laziness, so I changed it. Now you'll usually see me refer directly to someone's handle, an article author's surname* when it's known, or just say 'the author'. Occasionally it makes the sentence feel a touch stilted, so I haven't perfected it, but I'm much happier with that than the previous way. Sometimes I use 'they', which is gaining acceptance, but there's still a group of people that can't stand the singular 'they'. Overall it was fun training myself that way.
You'll be under more scrutiny, admittedly :)
*What prompted me to do this was watching a political talking heads show. I noticed that male politicians were always referred to by surname, as were older female ones, but young female politicians got the informal first-name treatment. It really drove home the difference in professional respect given to the various groups.
(Edit: Part of why I consider clear use of "you guys" to be so limited is that when used in professional/quasi-professional tech industry contexts, it can accidentally annoyingly remind readers that we're among very few women around: http://subfictional.com/2012/07/02/language-matters-stop-usi... )
I've been a public forum moderator for two or three days at this point. I'll probably find a lot of hybrid tones to use before there's a reliably good one. Your patience in the meantime is appreciated.
---
I'm kind of surprised to see you explicitly call attention to your usage of "you guys" in your post. I'd originally thought that I at least preferred it to leaving "you guys" there unannounced ... but given a little more thinking, I suspect it's actually worse. The subtext that you've provided there, to people who do not identify as "guys", is 'I know you're there, and I know that these words make some of you uneasy, but don't worry, I didn't mean to offend you, I just really really wanted to use these words anyway; I think they're worth the risk of offending you'.
I know what you were trying to get at -- you want to make Hacker News a better place for /everyone/. (And thanks for that!) I'm sure you didn't intend that meaning to non-guys, and I totally understand how that came about. But, given that, I think that you might want to edit those words. Can I recommend the usage of "you all", or if you want to be more colloquial, "you folks"?
At some point, you're going to need to accept that when some people use a term that's loaded for you, it's not necessarily loaded for them, and the problematic nature of the term is only problematic to you and your circles, and it's just not intended as insulting, demeaning, belittling, or othering.
To be clear: I'm not trying to minimize the feelings of women or other marginalized communities. Rather, I'm just saying that one way to respond is to aggressively 'colonize' words so that a positive meaning becomes the dominant meaning.
[0] http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/guy
I didn't really mean for my criticism to end up talking about further gender issues - it's really meant to be a comment on better communication. I was reading the submission about topic A, then hit a parenthetical remark that is justifying an orthogonal topic B, then back to topic A again. It doesn't scan well.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/you
[1] http://blog.ycombinator.com/meet-the-people-taking-over-hack...
tl;dr: special measures not required, IMHO.
(Gmail is turning 10 today!)
The tech world is having a day of fun, people interested in tech have to make the personal decision of whether or not they like each individual gag. If the masses approve then it has a place on a tech news feed. If you don't like it, feel free to make your opinion heard, just don't ask others to follow your opinion thoughtlessly.
I know the system pretty well. The trouble is that, left to its own devices, it doesn't optimize for signal/noise ratio. That's why we're appealing to the community to do so more consciously. The current post was an experiment in that. We're going to do a lot of such experiments until we see results.
HN isn't the whole of the tech world, nor has it ever been simply a vote aggregator. There are other factors, the most important of which is culture. HN's culture has been diluting, and we're going to address that.
It's true that that's opinionated. The only thing you'll get without an opinionated moderator is drift. If HN drifts, it won't be to an interesting place but a mediocre one.
If you can't handle a few bad jokes and lame stories, then stay of the news for a day and come back the next one, instead of getting emotional about it...
And there's no need to justify "guys" as "gender-inclusive". It's already known as such.
Can we now get back to the Hacker News without rules on what we have or don't have to do?
There are not 'strict rules', but there are certainly guidelines:
http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html