Hacker News Reader

Comment by woodruffw | Hacker News Reader

I took that to be the point -- we tend to be at our worst online, thanks to the unique combination of anonymity (I can say whatever I want with as many accounts as I want, without meaningful consequences) and absence of social cues (there's nobody around me, so I have no incentive to soften my language or weaken my opinions).

In other words, the way we talk online is not normal. Even outside of the free speech debate, it's worth noting that.

View on HN

You could also see it as the inverse. Online we talk as we really are, saying what we really think, and thus the quality and depth of the discussion will inevitably be higher and deeper than in the 'real world' where we are faced with relentless groupthink, desire to conform, self-censoring to avoid unrelated career blowbacks and so on.

Moreover online people can take the time to write something good (not saying they usually do of course), whereas in-person debates usually suffer from being shallow, filled with interruptions, half baked ideas, people getting artificially upset to try and 'win' and so on.

I'd actually like to see far more experimentation and research in online commenting and discussion forums. There's really been very little movement in this space since CmdrTaco retired.

I’m still here! I wish people would try more crazy stuff. I’d even help brainstorm the crazy!

No way! That's the response I least expected! :)

I'm a huge fan of the work you did on Slashdot and Slashcode back in the day. It's still by far the best thought out moderation system I've seen.

I'd love to see a modern respin of Slashcode that reused and enhanced the moderation ideas. Unfortunately my spare time project slots are all consumed already :(

You can see the same effects of anonymity in masses. Say, you are in a concert and the crowd starts to throw tomatoes to the artist for being bad (not that I have ever witnessed such act) - would those that threw a tomato do the same thing if they were alone and had to put a "face" for their own doings (because one can easily identify them)?

This is quite philosophical comparison, but I think its on the point.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com