Lobsters still got a pulse, largely.
It's also not open access. You have to run an invisible tightrope so its algorithms won't automatically shadowban you and then you have to run a barely visible tightrope to get enough karma to not have your posts automatically removed from every subreddit.
As in: I just don’t understand how IRC works…
Then again, maybe they like the ability to critique your posts without you being able to rebut their opinions. It's an effective tactic in online echo chambers.
This feels antithetical/dystopian/elitist compared to what online communities are, for me. I think it's ok for some communities to be like this, but I don't think it's the future of online communities.
I think that was one of the big mistakes/oversight that came with the Internet..
I am not so thankful. But it is coming from my view of the current world.
I think open Internet for business is good. But open Internet for communication was bad. I cannot think of one good thing that have resulted from an open internet for communication/discussions. It has turned out to result in a collective, perpetual state of seizure for all humanity.
I am someone who had to learn stuff from random encounters with books in the 90s. Even then, I would not have it any other way...
Deciding who is in or out is the fundamental basis of any community, that's freedom of association. That's what defines a community. A place anyone can enter is a train station bathroom and that's what the logical terminus of the open internet seems to be.
Although the statement "invite-only only is the future of online communities" isn't super well defined (what does it mean to "be the future"?), so I think the comments are debating past each other.
AI posts are usually the most commented on. Linus Torvalds’ comments saying that LLMs are actually useful is still on the front page, tagged as vibecoding, and has a lot of comments from people mostly disagreeing with him.
Lobste.rs is more of a monoculture than Hacker News. If you get downvoted enough they stick a banner on the top of the page inviting you to delete your account. It has a nasty side effect of driving away good contributors who don’t align perfectly with the hive mind. It’s a site where you learn to keep your mouth shut if your input doesn’t agree with what the core users want to hear.
edit: my response isn't about lobste.rs. I don't have an account there.
If you got into my group of death metal people, and suddenly started talking about Oasis... we would invite you to get out haha.
Same with patriots.win . They may be a group of right wing biggots, but hey, they did their platform and are happy talking there.
Some serious cognitive dissonance here.
I think a lot of people like this idea of a close-knit clique of like minded people, but the communities tend to pick up toxic qualities where membership becomes a game in itself. Anyone who doesn’t fall in line with the established in-crowd gets pushed out via the Byzantine rules that the in-crowd uses to maintain their position.
I still visit and participate, but I’m realistic about what it is. There is some value there, but you have to navigate it like a small subreddit where the moderator keeps tight control over what can be discussed and indirectly or directly influences the allowable opinions on the site. I really liked their original ideas about having an open moderation log and clear rules, but I’ve seen more than enough questionable moderation decisions and selective application of the rules to accept that it’s not as pure as I thought it was going to be.
That said, I don't believe it's as much of a hivemind as you've portrayed. I've seen dissenting opinions voiced there which weren't downvoted (or at least not noticeably), while the same opinion in a similar thread here on HN would be downvoted and flagged. So I don't think that getting downvoted enough so that you're invited to delete your account is a common occurrence with productive members.
It is! It’s a rite of passage on the site if you dare comment anything that someone might disagree with.
There have been several high profile cases of valued members getting fed up with it and leaving the site. One example where even the community was starting to question if this is really what they want: https://lobste.rs/s/zp4ofg
0: deleting comments of people who aren't interesting from my view and highlighting ones who often say things that are interesting, the user I'm replying to is one of the latter
There are some interesting comments there from some people who don’t spend time on other sites, but your assessment is similar to mine
My comment about being anti-AI above may not have been clear. They actually talk about AI a lot and AI threads attract a high amount of activity. The difference is that insightful or honest comments don’t have much of a chance because there’s a clear popular opinion on the site and any information that doesn’t fit isn’t welcome.
The giant soupy mess of opinions on HN can be tiresome, but it’s nice to get a wider range. HN is its own little bubble but at least there’s some diversity of experiences to be found.
I joined their IRC channel last week and it's been rather chill.
I do like the invite-only nature of the site though, keeps quality high...while making some folks tyrannical.
My intuition says it's to do with Status Signaling theory .