Ask HN: HN-type platform with in-house content, would you use it? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: HN-type platform with in-house content, would you use it?

2 pointsrunday1985 comments

When I want some quality content, the only platform I can confidently visit is HN.

Other platforms I have checked out (substack, medium, etc.) are horrible. They are too bloated with dumb people who write dumb articles. Finding high quality articles is very hard. (No, I don't care about 10 awesome tricks in React)

Good essays are even harder to find. Most people post those on their own websites. It does not help that such people rarely care about SEO so their websites are almost impossible to just come across by just googling.

HN has its own issues. Out of 30 displayed articles, I might be interested in 3-5 in the best case scenario. It would be great if there was some kind of category or tag-based filter I could apply.

My question is this. If there was a platform with content of similar quality to HN, that allowed you to: - If you are a reader, quickly find intellectually engaging content (created by writers on the platform), which you can filter if you want, keep tabs on creators that are to your liking, and participate in discussions. - If you are a writer, get access to comfortable (not over the top) environment for writing and revising/editing your content in markdown, publishing the said content and getting feedback in the form of comments.

Would you use it? Or is HN enough for the readers, and the writing alternatives enough for the writers?

IMHO, I think that HN complies with its objective. Of course, the addition of time effectiveness that you want to add would be valuable, but it has to be very well balanced between HN (as it is now) and other tagged/liked-based/filtered/central moderated platforms. I think it's more about the content itself, and not how it looks.

I believe that the way HN shows its content is plain, so there are no highlights, no biased information, and that maintains its quality. And that's how it remains reliable.

I'd use it initially while it's good, and then I'll stop once it becomes crappy. Just like has happened with every other website that has attempted this.

I think HN's approach is hard to beat, honestly. At least, it seems to be able to maintain a consistent quality level over the long term.

You are right.

It might not work out. But I think it's worth trying.

I believe that large part of HN's success has to do with its simplicity and lack of fluff. There is no sharing on social media, no "hearting" comments or posts, no way to see who liked a particular post, etc.. There are only posts and discussions. That's it.

If this is indeed what keeps out people who make such websites crappy, then it can be replicated.

As a reader I wouldn't mind another source of articles. It surely wouldn't replace HN but more variety is always welcome.

I'm curious as to how you will handle content moderation; will everything be vote-based or will there be free/paid moderators?

I think both approaches are used on HN, and I like that model. Votes are a cheap solution that work great as long as abuse is taken care of.

I have not thought of anything concrete yet as I literally got this idea yesterday. But I am confident that most of the drivel can be kept out of the platform. The goal is to keep out people who enjoy reading sweet nothings. As long as you don't have them on the platform, bad writers won't have an audience. To do this, make the platform as boring looking as possible (like HN). When those over-stimulated entertainment junkies don't find flashy content, they will go back to scrolling tiktok.

Replacing HN is not really the goal as HN is a news aggregator, not a content-hosting platform and it works great.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com