Complete speculation, but I feel that newer people tend to vote up Techcrunch articles (regardless of topic) because they've heard of it before.
Maybe giving their stories a somewhat lighter weighting, since they are easier to vote up.
Is there really much of a difference in content (NOT quality) between Venturebeat, Killer Startups, Alleyinsider, Centernetworks, GigaOm, RWW, Mashable, et al? I have no idea - what's everyone else think?
All this TC backlash is getting somewhat ridiculous but at the same time it is what it is. There's plenty of tech news sites out there but they all report on the same news because they all read the same feeds and have access to the same scoops. The only way to differentiate is to editorialize the news. It's much the same as 24 hour cable news.
But choosing to write 746 word blog posts or pounding TC with all these comments or upvoting these things to #1 is the real problem HN has. I really wish people would just let these minor things go.
Stop upvoting LAME stories. Stop upvoting whiney blog posts ABOUT lame stories. A bit of self control is a lot more powerful than censoring websites.
What's the problem with banning sources where 95% of the content has sadly become lame? If people want to read said stories they can go to that website. Or submit it to NonHackerNews. It's not like we're banning them from the internet.
You're right, but most people don't have self control, which is the root of the problem. I'm just trying to suggest changes to a system dealing with how things are instead of how we want them to be.