[AkshayPrabhu]

This is likely, I'd say it's due to the 90–9–1 rule[0] which states that the vast majority of your users would be lurkers, a small proportion would participate in discussions and the smallest number being the power users who generate most of the content on the platform

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1%25_rule_(Internet_culture)

[nefitty]

I’m curious as to why others behave this way for any discernible pattern to emerge. I’m more likely to comment on Reddit as opposed to on HN because I sort of make a quick simulation of how it will be received. Depending on my mood and whether I have an idea, if there’s a higher chance I’ll be downvoted, I’m more likely to refrain from participating.

HN is brutal when it comes to comments, not as harsh as StackOverflow, but the probabilities of a comment being received well here are so low. To me, the expectations generally seem to be that: individuals are discussing in good faith, the comment is not “booby trapped” to intentionally cause a negative emotional response, the poster has taken some non-negligible amount of time to form their thought or they are clearly versed in the topic (ie use the correct lingo, etc), any tinge of a political perspective leans libertarian, etc. Those are some of the factors I use to judge whether I should post a comment on HN.

On Reddit, the filter is “is my thought hilarious” or “I can significantly improve the direction of this conversation by participating.” On StackOverflow, my filter is, “has any other human that’s ever used SO ever wondered what I’m about to ask?”