>> This is not an attack. Merely an observation. You value the quality of HN. Be the quality. Don't be the problem.
I agree with most of what you wrote, except this part. Maybe I'm being naive but I believe discussion about stuff you don't like about a community-driven platform like HN might actually improve it. To me, the fact that articles like this hit HN more and more often, is separate from the discussion you can have about it.
>> People enjoy different things. You do not want to judge, so don't
You are twisting my words. I don't want to judge opinions, but that doesn't mean I can't have my own, and it also doesn't mean I can't express them in relation to the stuff that gets upvoted on HN. In everything I wrote about this article don't think I've passed any judgement on the author's opinion itself. You say 'people enjoy different things' as if that justifies anything that gets posted on HN. Lots of people enjoy reading about ponies, but you don't see a lot of articles about ponies on HN, and I don't think many people think that's a bad thing.
All I'm saying is that in the time I've been visiting HN, the information value of the articles upvoted on HN is going down. If this continues, before you know it HN will be like Gizmodo with a really crappy layout. Telling me to 'just don't read the articles' or 'just don't upvote them' is a pretty negative conclusion to draw from this discussion don't you think?
> Maybe I'm being naive but I believe discussion about stuff you don't like about a community-driven platform like HN might actually improve it.
In context. But when out of context, it won't. If anything, one could argue that if your comment does provide any value toward improving HN, then the article served a greater purpose, and as a result, was of value.
Regardless, actions speak louder than words.
> All I'm saying is that in the time I've been visiting HN, the information value of the articles upvoted on HN is going down.
That's the natural state of things. I've seen people say this for years now. It's a reoccurring theme. I do not know how long you've been visiting HN, but going just by your profile, I can assure you, 444 days ago, people were discussing how HN had gone down hill.
I believe a portion of that complaint is that when you first get here, it's new, and you haven't seen the articles being presented. After a while, you start to read the same thing over and over again. It becomes dull. And things start to stand out that you might not have noticed your first day.
> You are twisting my words.
No. It's just a misunderstanding. No twisting was intended.
> You say 'people enjoy different things' as if that justifies anything that gets posted on HN.
Actually, it does. HN is based on voting, and the members of HN enjoy reading many types of articles here. If something gets voted up, it's because a segment of the members want to read these types of things on HN. That you are uninterested in this specific topic does not mean it's outside of HN's accepted role.
> Lots of people enjoy reading about ponies, but you don't see a lot of articles about ponies on HN, and I don't think many people think that's a bad thing.
Don't be silly, the context is HN, making that point moot. The argument isn't about general wants and desires, but what people want to read here on HN.
Anyways, my point is, and was, you can either be a part of the problem, or part of the solution. If you want to see different articles, submit them! Ignore the ones that you aren't interested in. Flag articles that don't belong. You can either be a positive force, or a negative one.
I agree with most of what you wrote, except this part. Maybe I'm being naive but I believe discussion about stuff you don't like about a community-driven platform like HN might actually improve it. To me, the fact that articles like this hit HN more and more often, is separate from the discussion you can have about it.
>> People enjoy different things. You do not want to judge, so don't
You are twisting my words. I don't want to judge opinions, but that doesn't mean I can't have my own, and it also doesn't mean I can't express them in relation to the stuff that gets upvoted on HN. In everything I wrote about this article don't think I've passed any judgement on the author's opinion itself. You say 'people enjoy different things' as if that justifies anything that gets posted on HN. Lots of people enjoy reading about ponies, but you don't see a lot of articles about ponies on HN, and I don't think many people think that's a bad thing.
All I'm saying is that in the time I've been visiting HN, the information value of the articles upvoted on HN is going down. If this continues, before you know it HN will be like Gizmodo with a really crappy layout. Telling me to 'just don't read the articles' or 'just don't upvote them' is a pretty negative conclusion to draw from this discussion don't you think?