[trinsic2]

I think the right people will stick around. There is a certain kind of indivudal that has the paitence to understand that a system that restricts new accounts from post is a good thing. Of recent, there have been a lot of posters that come here from the open web just to try and slant opinion.

[mastazi]

But sticking around doesn't solve the scenario mentioned by parent.

1. some interesting projects gets to HN main page

2. author of the project is not on HN so creates a green account and interacts

even if that person would have the patience to stick around, by the time they would be able to respond, it would be too late for it to be relevant to the (now stale) discussion.

[qingcharles]

This is one of the best things about HN. The sheer number of times someone has posted a link and the author or someone significant to the project deep within some megacorp makes a green account and starts answering questions that you never thought would get answered. Some of the most golden replies come from greenies.

[dang]

Yes, and we've always gone out of our way to protect those. It's perhaps the thing I hate the most about our software that sometimes it kills such posts.

[ddingus]

These are some of the best interactions we have here.

For sure a problem worth considering.

I can't think of anything easy...

Only even remotely sensible thought I have at present:

We add a check box to replies created by new accounts. Maybe created by all accounts?

The prompt reads something to the effect of: I am mentioned in the article. And then they get to say how.

-This is my project -I am mentioned by name -Etc...

Whatever it is they wrote, appears somehow, maybe as a required line or something.

Others can see that and either flag the account or vouch.

This at least some what distributes the required attention load.

That said, I don't like it. Have nothing better, so here it is!

Then others seeing that

[thaumasiotes]

> even if that person would have the patience to stick around, by the time they would be able to respond, it would be too late for it to be relevant to the (now stale) discussion

This is a fundamental part of how HN sees its own functioning; they refer to it as "rate limiting".

[brudgers]

I believe HN's success is in large part not presuming to have a good idea of what "the right people" are.

This doesn't mean it doesn't have a strong sense of what bad behavior is. It clearly does.

[wizzwizz4]

I am only that kind of individual when I'm inclined to post unconstructively – not that I know that, at the time. When I'm feeling constructive, friction is likely to make me take my constructive energies elsewhere.

[Waterluvian]

The SA Forums model does accomplish the goals of filtering out noise, but then you’re stuck with a stagnant community of “the right people.”

[bombcar]

Unironically slashdot's moderating and meta-moderating is the best long-term system I've seen.

Everything else seems to eventually cause new blood to dry up.

[jtchang]

I remember reading slashdot but what is their system? Is there a separate set of mods that moderate the moderators?

[throwaway173738]

You get points to mod other people and other people can meta-mod your posts.

[bombcar]

The key is that both were randomly assigned to users - you’d never know if you’d open a thread and be a moderator. If you posted in the thread you couldn’t moderate.

And about the same frequency you’d be assigned to metamoderate, basically being asked if a moderator’s “vote” was a good one or not (you didn’t have to fully agree you’d do the same, just that it wasn’t bad).

Someone who scored low in meta moderation would get less or no moderator chances.

[trinsic2]

I stopped reading slashdot along time ago.. I wonder why.