Ask HN: Advice on dealing with criticism | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Advice on dealing with criticism

19 pointsbrandnewlow23 comments

I'm developing a social news site for Chicago (digg-style link voting alongside original reporting and commentary). I've got about 8 people giving advice and tips along the way, but I'm a solo founder. About half of the people in my feedback loop are generally positive about the project. About half aren't. And now and then people surface to say they like what I'm doing while others surface to say they don't.

How do you guys approach criticism? I know you're supposed to make sure you get a real, accurate assessment of how things are going, but sometimes exposing myself to so much criticism is a real downer.

View on HN

For every person your product is right for, there's going to be a ton of people your product /isn't/ right for. The people who it isn't right for can have two reactions. They can be indifferent, or they can be critical.

If they're indifferent, so be it.

Being critical is a different ball game altogether. It either means that they like it but want changes, or they have some sort of grudge against the concept, or they want you to be working on something else. You can safely discard the last two types of criticism.

The first type "they like it, but it's not perfect" is the group to actually listen to. Can you fix what they don't like about the product without diluting your vision of what it is? If not, do they have a better vision for your product that you might incorporate? No? Then don't worry about it, this isn't your audience talking.

They like it but it's not perfect can also be used as a strategy for avoiding saying they don't like it. "I'd use it if it had one more feature...".

Listen ONLY to users who login regularly and plead for features.

I think this is also sound advice. I get a great deal of feedback from my bloggers and contributors and I take that very seriously. They're using the platform daily to create original content and build their own audiences. The easier I make their lives, the easier they make my life. On the other hand there are a good number of observers with spare thoughts for me. Sometimes helpful, sometimes not. Good distinction. Thanks.

You've got this backwards: 'deal' with praise, use criticism.

Touche (use imagination to insert the accent). The criticism is almost always helpful. Last night a local journalist wrote me to trash a story we ran. After a flurry of e-mails the result was that I have a finder understanding for what that segment of our audience (other bloggers and writers in this market) expects out of their reading material. That's a win.

One of the very noticeable things I've observed, and I'm sure someone else has already blogged about this, is that if you're doing something "new" people will hate on it because it can't be done... but if you're doing something that sounds like it's already been "done", you'll get hated on because you shouldn't bother doing it.

Really it boils down to being able to differentiate hater-ade from constructive criticism.

This is only from MY personal experience: I have found that I take criticism more negatively for projects I am myself not fully convinced about.

My advice: fully be sold on your idea before inviting outside opinions. Otherwise outside opinion, especially negative, is just an EXCUSE to drop an idea you were never convinced about yourself.

Talk is cheap. Don't seek validation of your idea from others. Except of course when they are people that matter(and there are limits to that too). ie. VCs, potential cofounders.

Your last point is one I've learned the hard way. When I started this project I had a large, enthusiastic group of volunteer writers and contributors trumpeting the effort. That's great. The problem was I was leaning a bit too hard on them for validation of the idea itself. Not great. I've since stepped back a bit and forced myself to keep high level questions and opinions to myself. I talk writing with the writers and that's that.

Have your peanut gallery enter and then vote on the tips and feature requests, and get the karma system going? Use that traffic to test code and servers and to sound out the comments and the requests, and then to establish in-network invites.

This is a great idea. It would really separate the men from the boys.

If your too sensitive to criticism then a startup will be hell. Hard to generalise about entrepreneurs, but confidence and resultant tough skins are integral. If your more a creative type, then get a pitbull co-founder to take off the heat.

First you have to see if the criticism is constructive or destructive. If it is destructive eg. "Your idea sucks!". Well then just ignore it. You have to develop a bit of a thick skin and ignore the naysayers and the ones who want to put you done. If the criticism is constructive then make sure you understand what needs to be done or how you can use it to your advantage.

In my experience being a solo founder is very tough because you have to keep yourself motivated. Having a partner helps so that you can take turns at picking each other up when times get tough.

Know your advisers and use them. The main problem to solve is knowing when to listen --- and when not to. Look for commonalities in what they're saying. If you average their feedback together, which concerns float to the the top of the stack?

If it's a social news site, why not have them enter each concern as a separate item? To the extent that others agree, that concern will get up-voted. Then there's transparency for all involved when you listen and when you don't. And they end up using your product more.

Unfortunately, it goes with the territory.

But, if you believe in your work and you hear positive, the positive is your audience. Work for your audience ... don't dismiss the negative if such is constructive feedback you can use to make a better product.

Just think how many people hated on various businesses (myspace, twitter come to mind) and yet they became wildly successful!

Keep your head up!

The best way to deal with criticism or praise is to have it refined into something you can actually use. I would suggest asking someone to take the good and bad things people tell you and summarize it objectively. Then find someone else with perhiperal involvement in your effort monitor what you do over time and tell you how their observations compare with the ones from the summary.

The lukewarm reaction is the least useful. Bona fide criticism or praise is always useful. The first thing you should seek to understand is whether the person has the problem/need that you hope to address. Talk to them about the problem before you get their feedback on your current solution iteration.

You have to approach it objectively, not personally. You have to have the determination and perseverance to take some flak and keep going. And you need to be open to changing your idea if you realise the criticism is justified.

You'll never satisfy everyone, don't discount good criticism that also gives you solution, do discount the "meh it sucks" criticism

Honestly? Suck it up - that's life. You can't expect 100% of people to like what you do 100% of the time.

It might help to prioritize the feedback by the individual's credibility. In the end, go with your gut.

Remember that running a business is about risk -- making decisions with imperfect information.

There are lots of risks. If you get tied up too much in worrying about them all you won't get anything accomplished.

I think part of maturing is being able to sort out what problems to act on and what to ignore. This is probably an acquired taste. In other words, take as much criticism as you can and then ignore them. Over time, you'll be able to deal with more and more negativity without it screwing you up. That's where you want to be -- able to handle all of the possible problems and still being optimistic about what you're doing. That's the spot you can grow from.

But heck if I would want a dozen or more people critiquing me all the time. I'd rather use a forum like this every now and then to critique the big issues instead of getting a running stream of advice.

I approach criticism critically. Then I usually decide the person criticizing me is an idiot, the wrong person to talk to, or that they had something useful to say. When people criticize me, it doesn't make me feel down. It makes me feel smarter or at least ahead of the curve around my ideas, some of the time, and lets me learn something useful the rest of the time.

You sound like you are running a neuro-semantic loser script about your project. That's not the way to change the world. You can't play this game if you care that much about what eight douchebags who happen to know you think. Instead of "criticism is a downer" try substituting "criticism is a valuable chance to play a mental game with my ideas"

You should lose the depressed downer reaction right away. Then, you should think about the criticism, and if it's useful, don't be so arrogant that you don't take it. If it's not useful, either they are stupid or just not relevant. Either way, nothing to be depressed about. Or, maybe you actually are a loser and just are in a state of cognitive denial about what a loser situation you are in, I don't know.

(You could give your framework to communities all over the country who do similar community reporting.)

Er. Well. At least you're honest?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com