[cubedice]

Maybe. But it's still sad to see this site change into a big site with a wider audience. I definitely care less and less for the "discussion" that takes place here, which is frustrating to watch. Perhaps I'm just feeling pessimistic, but it seems like recently the tide of new visitors is too large to be assimilated without permanently changing HN's culture. Damn, maybe I am getting old...

EDIT: I also seem to recall that constant vigilance about the site's quality has always been a topic of discussion here. It's definitely healthy to raise a concern or two every now and again

[jacquesm]

How to say this without getting moderated into the ground...

Look, this site is what you make it. If you do not like the conversations, then start your own by submitting the kind of content that you'd like to see or at least participate.

You've been here almost 2 years, in that time you have not made a single submission and one of your 20 comments in that time is about how you don't like the direction the site is going in.

If you don't like it then take action, change the discussion to contain those elements that you care about and use your mod points to promote the content that you think contributes to the discussion most.

There is an awful lot of 'oh, I really don't like the direction HN is going in' here, as well as 'it used to be so nice'. I don't get that, it's pretty good right now, there is a TON of interesting stuff posted and discussed here.

I haven't been here nearly as long as you have, and I concur there are some 'growing pains' but on the whole it is pretty good. Help make it better!

[cubedice]

I agree that users should participate if they want to make the site better. And yes, there still are interesting posts. Still, I see people getting modded up for saying "go with the flow," and modded down for questioning the site's direction. First of all, these are OPINIONS, usually not worthy of up or down mods.

I guess what I should have said was discussion about this site's direction used to be an important part of HN, and I wanted to continue that tradition.

[jwecker]

Introspection is very healthy and worthy, I agree. My response was meant to counteract a little of the alarmism. As for opinions getting mods, that's generally how it works- in a way every post is a poll and you get people agreeing with that opinion or not- everyone understanding that it's really just an opinion. It's certainly rarely meant to be personal.

In short, if someone is modded down for questioning the site's direction, people are indicating that they respectfully disagree for the most part. (Man, I must have reached some kind of zen state today.)

[biohacker42]

Look, this site is what you make it.

Yes, that's why a lot more people will make it into something that's DIFFERENT from what it was when there were a lot fewer people.

You've been here almost 2 years, in that time you have not made a single submission

Red herring.

If you don't like it then take action

He can not do diddlysquat. Only pg and the mods could take action by viciously removing any article which even remotely strays from a pre-determined core character.

There is an awful lot of 'oh, I really don't like the direction HN is going in' here, as well as 'it used to be so nice'. I don't get that, it's pretty good right now

That's because we've seen this movie before. You may not have had a front row seat for the downfall of your favorite social news site, but many of us have seen it happen many times.

I haven't been here nearly as long as you have, and I concur there are some 'growing pains' but on the whole it is pretty good.

And as much as I like this place, I predict it is doomed, and before long even you will abandon it.

[jacquesm]

I don't understand your 'red herring' reference, if you do not increase the signal-to-noise ratio when you are perfectly capable of doing so then you can't really complain.

Also, everybody can 'flag' articles that are not suitable.

What was your favourite social news site before ?

[biohacker42]

It simply means that it doesn't matter how many articles you submit. If more people prefer other articles, with say more linkbait headlines, then yours will be buried. In short, simply submitting and voting is not a solution when more, many more people are voting other things up. More generic, shallower things.

And I flag a lot of articles, but very few of those get banned, same principle as with submitting. If a few people flag and a lot vote up, it stays. And "few" and "a lot" are relative terms here. They'll change with time.

I've seen narrow and deep focused discussions be replaced with wide and shallow discussions on many sites, but in rough order: Slashdot/Digg/Reddit/programming-reddit/science-reddit and I know I'm forgetting a few that came and went fast.

[skwaddar]

I'm going to follow you because that's my path too (though Digg was short lived).

The process is known as "the September that never ends".

Slashdot is a bit better now days though the rate of submission is slow.

[biohacker42]

Yep, Digg was a blip for me as well. It turned to crap lightning fast.

When PGs essays first led people away from Slashdot to Reddit, there was a noticable drop in the quality of Slashdot. And early on Reddit was a like beautiful jewel of social news sites.

[anigbrowl]

Look on the bright side - newmogul (HN clone for finance) still gets many interesting posts but community discussion there has almost completely dried up.

[biohacker42]

Damn, maybe I am getting oldDamn, maybe I am getting old

You're not getting old. This has happened to many sites. And it will happen here as well. If you go way back in time you see me politely disagree with pg that soft policing is doomed to failure and the redditization of hn. Oh well. C'est la vie.