Tell HN: Clickable domains and other new features for story quality
306 points| dang | 10 years ago
We've adjusted the dupe detector to reject fewer URLs. If a story hasn't had significant attention in about the last year, reposts are ok. That's been the policy for a while, but we've brought the software closer to it. It will still reject reposts for a few hours, though, to avoid stampedes. Allowing reposts is a way of giving high-quality stories multiple chances at making the front page. Please do this tastefully and don't overdo it.
When reposting, please don't delete the earlier post. Deletion is for things that shouldn't have been posted in the first place, such as if you regret having said something publicly.
When a story is a duplicate—that is, has had significant attention on HN in the last year or so—it's helpful to post a comment linking to the previous major thread, so users and/or moderators can flag the dupe. In addition, when a URL isn't the best source for a given story, it's helpful to post a better URL in the thread. We often see those and change the posts to use them.
Both these practices are common in the HN community and make a big difference to story quality here. Thank you all! The following features are intended to make them quicker to do. We built them to make moderation easier for ourselves, but hope they'll be helpful for community moderation too.
First, you can click on a story's domain to see the previous HN submissions from that site.
Second, when you're logged in, stories on /newest and on /item pages have 'past' and 'web' links. Click on 'past' to search HN for previous stories with that title. This helps with finding duplicates. Click on 'web' go to a Google search for the story title. This helps with finding better sources and catching spam.
Finally, when a story is the first post from a site, logged-in users will see the site name in green, by analogy with the green usernames of noob accounts.
These really are experimental and if any proves unhelpful, we'll toss it. We want HN to stay simple and coherent and not just be an agglutination of features. Your feedback will mostly decide what we do, so feed away!
Edit: ok, we tossed the green sites. More people disliked than liked them, and the same information is available just by clicking on the site name anyway.
[+] [-] greenyoda|10 years ago|reply
[1] https://new-hn.algolia.com/?experimental&sort=byDate&prefix=...
[+] [-] dang|10 years ago|reply
I do agree that it would be good to weed out variants of the same story (or better, merge them), and we're open to working on that. But today's features are more modest—nothing more than a way of easing the manual work that many of us are already doing. Not least yourself!
[+] [-] Amorymeltzer|10 years ago|reply
That being said, these are all great features. More information access without being overly cluttered is a huge win for everyone.
[+] [-] rahimnathwani|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] grecy|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] grmarcil|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 001sky|10 years ago|reply
you should be able to scroll a page and pick out the top 5 original comments...even without collapsing...
[+] [-] chdir|10 years ago|reply
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8297695
[+] [-] koala_advert|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|10 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] DanBC|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ClintEhrlich|10 years ago|reply
People need to know about rules before they can reliably follow them. And Hacker News makes that surprisingly hard for new people.
Above the submit button, there is a line that says: "If you haven't already, would you mind reading about HN's approach to comments?"
I wanted to make sure I followed the rules, so I clicked the hyperlink and began reading a new page. It began, "Hacker News is a bit different from other community sites, so we'd appreciate it if you'd take a minute to read the site guidelines."
I thought that was the page that I had just clicked through to, so I continued reading. And it seemed like I was right: I learned about the rules against crap links, rudeness, etc.
Unfortunately, I was wrong. The first link took me to the 'welcome page' — which provides some guidelines for using the site, but not all of the rules. If you want to learn the rest of the rules, you have to know to click on another hyperlink to reach the site guidelines page. I found this counter-intuitive, and I doubt I'm the only one.
If you want people to learn the rules, please consider placing them beneath the existing text on the welcome page, so everyone will realize they exist. Or, at minimum, place a link to the guidelines page directly above the submit button, instead of just sending people back to the welcome page. And maybe add a "Rules" tab to the top navigation bar.
Thanks for your help!
[+] [-] dang|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] minimaxir|10 years ago|reply
However, the green-URL-for-noob-domains may be problematic. The green is used to give an indication for potentially low-quality content, but public startup/project launches would all fall under the noob-domain heading.
[+] [-] dang|10 years ago|reply
I wouldn't say that at all! It's just interesting to know what's new.
We've been displaying new sites in green to moderators for a while now. When a high-quality story comes from a brand new (to HN) site, that's interesting. The converse, too: it's interesting when you can see that an obscure site isn't new to HN (because it's not green). Often someone posted it like 6 years ago and it got no upvotes; or sometimes there was actually a major thread. Now you can click on the domain to find out. HN has a rich history that's fun to explore.
Edit: I'll give you, though, that green sites and green usernames have higher variance. The good ones are really good (think of the author of a story showing up in the thread to discuss it), while the bad ones are more likely to be spam. I think it's fine to call attention to it in either case.
[+] [-] nkurz|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jkimmel|10 years ago|reply
HN comments contain a lot of a value in aggregate, and it would be a shame to lose necessary context to exploit this value due to simple link-rot.
However, I can see issues arising with paywalled links. The HN cache would likely display a rather useless paywall for many of the most popular stories. Navigating around the paywall by technical means may present an IP issue.
[+] [-] dang|10 years ago|reply
If we did anything like it again, I'd still hope to share it with everybody, but perhaps not by adding a third link. I already feel bad for adding two.
[+] [-] brento|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] snake117|10 years ago|reply
Thanks for the changes. I'll definitely send feedback along the way.
[+] [-] kaolinite|10 years ago|reply
I never visit the new section of HN. I really wish I did but I always forget about it. However, if there was a little section for new articles on the homepage (perhaps at the bottom or the side of the page in a box) I'd definitely check some out and upvote the interesting articles.
[+] [-] mdaniel|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] brudgers|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dang|10 years ago|reply
I'm surprised that the green sites turned out to be controversial because I have found them helpful as a moderator and a reader, but in retrospect I can see why a visually noticeable change would be. We're not attached to this feature.
[+] [-] jacobolus|10 years ago|reply
Maybe use something like #6a8966 (http://www.colorpicker.com/6a8966)?
[+] [-] dang|10 years ago|reply
Maybe we can tone it down a bit though.
[+] [-] voltagex_|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Laaw|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] waterlesscloud|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kawera|10 years ago|reply
I think the dupe detection would be even more useful if done during submission.
[+] [-] dang|10 years ago|reply
Writing software to identify which URLs are really about the same thing and which URLs are not is a nontrivial problem. I'd love to work on solving that in the general-enough case to be useful for HN, but we shouldn't let that stop us from doing incremental things to make life easier in the short run.
[+] [-] Osiris|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dang|10 years ago|reply
Making higher-octane software that can automate more of this has been on our list for a while, but it's hard to know when we'll get to that.
[+] [-] codezero|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dang|10 years ago|reply
Edit: this should be fixed now. Is it?
[+] [-] chmaynard|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JeffreyKaine|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shortlived|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hyperpallium|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dang|10 years ago|reply
Hence the 'avoid stampedes' part I mentioned above.
[+] [-] coldpie|10 years ago|reply