[Normille]

  >Yes. The former submission got enough attention, so it shouldn't be submitted for a year.

If this is official policy, it's kind of laughable to single out 'Show HN' posts for this treatement, given how any major techie news story gets submitted over and over and over again for days on end. I've complained about this so many times in the past, to no avail. Anyone who uses the 'Newest' page as their HN landing page will know what I mean.

[Tomte]

It's official (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html), and it's not limited to Show HNs.

[Normille]

  >It's official (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html), and it's not limited to Show HNs.

----

Are reposts ok?

If a story has not had significant attention in the last year or so, a small number of reposts is ok. Otherwise we bury reposts as duplicates.

----

Unfortunately, since there's no penalty for spamming the site with endless repeat posts of articles already submitted countless times before, people continue to do it. Contrast that with the comments section, where there are penalties for abusive behaviour and people generally tend to behave in a more respectful way to other HN-ers.

I wonder; if the system really did check for duplication [I can't believe it does, given the number of repeat posts I see] and if people lost a karma point* for submitting an article that had already been submitted X times within the last X hours or days, would we see a lot less 'submission spamming'?

*Assuming that the people posting what are obviously repeat submission are doing so for the 'internet points' rather than from any genuine belief that they're sharing something new with us, that might actually be a deterrent.

[gus_massa]

Most tech stories are submitted from different sources. Each time there is a big new, there are like 10 or 20 newspapers/blogs/tech-sites that write a coverage.

The mods somehow try to keep only one, if they are too similar, but sometimes it's difficult. And in some cases each day there is a new part of the story that appears, and that sometimes make the new post interesting.

[Normille]

  >Most tech stories are submitted from different sources. Each time there is a big new, there are like 10 or 20 newspapers/blogs/tech-sites that write a coverage.

Yes. and most of those news sources are pretty indistinguishable from each other too. Simply re-hashing the same press releases as everyone else with the obligatory quoting of tweets --which is what passes for investigative journalism these days. I'll grant you that may account for some of the dupliction. But I see the same stories from the same sources submitted time after time, too.

I just find it really irritating. It's little different from spam, in my opinion and I wish people would have the courtesy towards other HN users to spend a few seconds checking if a story has already been submitted before mashing the Submit button themselves. In some cases people are still re-submitting major tech stories days after they happened.

A classic example was Musk's take over of Twitter. I remember there were 30+ submissions of that story alone, when I counted part way through the day it hppened and people were still submitting it a couple of days later. That's just downright spamming, in my book. Who the hell can frequent HN and think that, 3 days after the event, no-one will yet have shared with the rest of us the biggest tech news story of the year?

As I always say, when getting on my soapbox about this: Just try spending a few days using HN, with the 'Newest' section as your landing page and you'll soon see how much of a problem this is:

https://news.ycombinator.com/newest

[gus_massa]

I agree but it's worse with science news. There are a few science sites that just cut and paste the press release from the university. When the press release is horrible but linkbaity, the only good part is that I can take a look at the research paper and wikipedia. So when it's reposted from another URL I can write a comment trying to fix the press release or debunking the article.

I actually prefer to read \newest . The discussions in the front page usually have so many comments and the discussion gets less technical. Repetition and spam is a problem, but it's nice to find a few jewels from time to time.