Ask HN: Which usernames do you recognise? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Which usernames do you recognise?

38 pointsmixmax59 comments

In the light of the current experiment of not showing comment ratings there's been a lot of (good) discussion about what criteria people use to vote. One thing that came up was giving a positive bias to usernames you recognize for their previous insightful comments or their expertise on a certain subject.

So the question is: Which usernames do you recognise, and why?

View on HN

The question is inaccurate, because you're really asking which usernames we can recall. ;-) That's often an order of magnitude smaller than the ones we can recognize. The only way to test who we recognize is to MRI us, show us a bunch of usernames, see if the recognition centers of our brain light up.

That said, here's who I can recall off the top of my head:

YCombinator principals: pg, rtm, jl, tlb

Famous people: joshu, pmarca, paul, jeresig

Semi-famous people: aboodman, tptacek, cperciva, lisper, jrockway, ojbyrne, epi0Bauqu

YCombinator founders: sama, dhouston, ivankirigin, tipjoy, spez, aaronsw, mattmaroon, AlexS, SwellJoe, brezina, fallentimes, brett (at least, I think it's that Brett...the SlinkSet founder)

YCombinator company employees I've hung out with or otherwise interacted with: aston, dfranke, gaborcsalle

Folks I've met in person since moving to the Bay Area: lacker, litewulf, iamelgringo, abossy, timcederman, gaius

Prolific posters: nickb, rms, wheels, davidw, mechanical_fish, DanielBMarkham, edw519, swombat, patio11, raganwald, pchristensen, staunch, byrneseyeview, llimllib, ryanwaggoner, Alex3917, menloparkbum, DaniFong, dcurtis, unalone, masklinn, apotheon, plinkplonk, mynameishere.

(Yeah, I cheated and looked at the leaderboard and a few comment threads for that last one. The original question was recognition, not recall though.)

gaborcselle and wheels are also founders.

Wow, I thought wheels was just an active user. Didn't know he was a part of the YC crew.

He was an active users before his startup (Direct Edge) joined YC this summer I believe.

I'm way behind on basically anything that happened since SFP08. :-) Though I should've remembered Gabor - I've read a few posts on ReMail since.

Also completely forgot tonywright, who's also a YC founder and someone whose posts I enjoy reading a lot.

Off topic, but you can test recognition a lot easier. Show a huge list of randomly generated names with real ones mixed in and measure galvanic skin response.

MRI would be hugely expensive and probably totally inconclusive really.

One thing that came up was giving a positive bias to usernames you recognize for their previous insightful comments

Interesting question.

I have a great deal of respect for many people here (too many to mention), but oddly, I don't think that has much influence on how I feel about new posts. Every thread is fresh and every day we start over. So no matter how insightful you've been in the past, you just gotta keep doing it. I suppose that's the way it should be.

Elegantly stated.

I, too, recognize and respect many people here. I would not dare to list them all, just as I would not dare to try and publicly list all my friends. That way lies nothing but inadvertent slights and endless apologies.

And I think knowing a bit about a writer's background is almost always of value to me.

But that doesn't mean I upvote posts on that basis. Upvoting is an editorial function. You don't do it for yourself. You do it for other people. And so the quality of each piece of writing must stand and fall on its own.

You have to learn to think like this to write effectively. You have to try to look dispassionately at the writing of people you like and admire. Because, alas, there is nothing more dear to you than your own prose. William Faulkner said: "In writing, you must kill all your darlings." You will write a lot of stuff that looks good to you, but that just doesn't fit. You will write stuff that starts out sensible and then turns on itself. You will write things that are just too delicate to say on the web. And you will make boneheaded mistakes. The art of writing is not so much to avoid doing these things, but to catch yourself in the act and edit them, as consistently as you can, and hopefully without hurting your own feelings too much.

I think that might have been Arthur Quiller-Couch advising to "murder all your darlings", according to the book Writing Tools I was reading last night.

Are you implying that random Google results might be wrong? ;)

Next time I'll try to remember to use Wikiquote, to obtain the definitive wrong attribution.

Almost none. I've been reading HN for about one year, and Something about the minimalism of the layout and lack of signatures makes me just read the comments and not think about who wrote them.

Same here. But I think that is the idea - to let the comments speak for themselves and let the comments sink or swim on their own merits.

I recognise quite a few. Off the top of my head is tpcatek, cperciva and dfranke because of their expertise, mechanical_fish, nostrademons, jacquesm, jasonlbaptiste, mattmaroon and tokenadult because they often have something intersting to say, markbao because he's a great entrepreneur at a young age, and danielbmarkham because he has life experience.

I completely ignore names other than pg, a personal friend or two, and names on my confirmation-biased list of obnoxious karma whores. I don't make a mental note of "X must be a smart character" when I upvote X's comments.

yeah, same for me - not putting too much attention into posters name.

but it seems there are groups of people here that know and hang out with each other and act as a herd on the site - upvoting their own and downvoting any outsider.

As psychological effects go, it is rather questionable whether it is possible to 'ignore names'. This question does not concern a fully conscious process. Once you've noticed a name (and it's hard not to), all kinds of things go click inside your head. You cannot undo the associations that were made; the mere fact that you attempt to 'ignore' names already indicates that there is something to ignore.

The unavoidable state of mind with which I will read a comment from 'cperciva' or 'tptacek' (whom I recognize, along with pg, edw512, jacquesm and a few others) is: 'this is likely to be a comment from a security point of view and I'm likely to consider it a high quality answer'. I don't understand in what way that would pose a problem, unless you suppose that causes one to immediately lose the capacity to critically evaluate the content of the comment and conclude 'hmmm, a disappointing comment'. I think that risk is larger when I would assume that I could ignore the name and would hence be influenced by subconscious processes whose existence I tried to deny.

From the viewpoint of a HN lurker:

-pg - Because he's PG

-edw517, mechanical_fish - Due to frequent sighting of their comments

-tokenadult - You'll always find him in threads that contain discussions about human intelligence/alternative education

-potatolicious - U.S. immigration discussions + Canada vs. USA issues

-markbao - Entrepreneur, 16 years old

-mahmud - A technology nomad (originally from the Washington DC Metro, now in Australia)

These are the ones I can recall from top of my head. I do recognize many other usernames, of course. Also, I would like to point out I have no inclination to upvote the individuals mentioned above. I think it's more about frequency, since most of them tend to partake in discussions that cover a wide range of topics.

Just because they're experts in one area doesn't mean I'll find their opinions insightful no matter what. Each posting/comment is taken into consideration.

Perhaps if/when the hidden-scores experiment concludes, PG can try a hidden-usernames experiment. Namely:

For each submission's threads, a user would be assigned a new temporary (but stable) handle. Only later -- a few days, or when the article has dropped out of the top ~60 -- would these revert to the permanent names.

Variants: let a submitter opt a submission's threads into this system -- perhaps permanently for that item, or for the period of initial discussion/rating. Or, let a member in good standing adopt such a 'mask' for the duration of one item's discussion.

I've suggested making usernames invisible unless you mouse-over a field. That way you can still see a name if you mean to, but you're mainly judging by content.

Making some kind of temporary "masks" is too much PIA IMHO.

I recognize quite a few. Especially the people who hang out on #startups - swombat, axod (well, hung out, no thanks to freenode...), wheels, daleharvey, etc... Indeed, it'd be interesting to meet more of you in person. I wonder who matches what I think of them and who doesn't. I know pg's accent didn't quite square with the one I had in my head for the essays.

I am guessing that the only change made here was removal of the comment point value, no sorting changes?

I ask only because if this experiment becomes permanent its good public knowledge.

EDIT: I meant to include my thoughts on the change. If this change was made with the mindset that "friends" will automatically vote eachother up I think its probably a mistake. My reasoning here is that the voting up will still occur regardless of the value shown or not, if anything it might promote people to vote someone they like up just to contribute to the magical score thats hidden away. If they were to see that the person already has 10 votes its possible they might feel that was enough value already assigned to the comment.

This list is far from exhaustive:

People who joined much earlier than I whose comments I think about away from the computer (my heuristic for "recognize") include mechanical_fish, robg, pg (of course), and DanielBMarkham. I read a lot more of the "anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity" posts than of the "hacking and startups" posts.

Some people on board more recently whose usernames catch my attention include cwan, and there is a fairly large group of users, including quite a few from the leader list

http://news.ycombinator.com/leaders

that I recognize as interesting posters but can't identify as recent users or as long-time users.

To the best of my knowledge and belief, I've not met any HN participant in person.

patio11 and mechanical_fish tend to be consistently insightful, and rarely mean.

concur for patio11 - in fact, upon reflection, his is really the only username that ever pops out at me.

I tend comment on HN without consideration for usernames.

I also notice patio from my days on the JOS forums, which he also frequents.

From the viewpoint of someone pretty new:

pg, of course

mechanical_fish, unalone, patio11, jacquesm, edw519, riderofgiraffes (too memorable), abyssknight. I haven't read enough to easily recognize consistently insightful commenters yet. The names I currently have in memory are there probably due to frequency, insightful comments, activity in the same threads as me, replying to me, or their name struck me as interesting/memorable.

I remember a few usernames of famous people, people that I know in some way, directly or indirectly, 99% of usernames are new to me every time I read one. This means that basically I (and IMHO most of the HN guys) tend to vote comments mainly by comment quality. Still I believe that it is very hard to avoid to be biased in some way by the ability to read the current comment score.

Someone came up to me at a London startup event and said they recognized my name from hacker news. Made my night.

I've had a couple people come up in one of my classes that I recognized the names from HN. Any of you who have talked at Def-Con/Black Hat/similar conferences, you've probably come up in some classes, and its weird to have that happen with someone you've talked to.

Someone recognized me at one of the NY YC meetups, based on writing / talking style.

About a year and a half ago, kirubakaran and I met at the door of a yc event and decided to put our hacker news names on our name tags. I had already been posting for about a year by then. People I didn't recognize walked up to me saying things like, "I like the way you handle third normal form," "I can't believe you still code to ie6," and "Your object code is my source code." A night this hacker will never forget.

For every username I recognise for previous insightful comments, I also recognise one for something 'bad'. Although I don't vote according to this, it does at least show me that positive bias is not the only potential 'worry' in a points-based rating system like HN.

Why does a 'bad' post have anything to do with the ratings though? Even with no rating whatsoever you will still find people with 'good' and 'bad' posts and recognize them by their username. The only way to to get rid of this would be to make all users anonymous.

I wasn't necessarily referring to posts when referring to "bad" - I've seen/experienced behaviour from HN members outside of here that negatively impacts my opinion of them.

Nonetheless, I was just making the point that it's not just about positive bias, which is what many people seem to dwell on.

This is top of the head so no promises on spelling. I remember cpercevia because he had a really great proof from a post your proofs challenge I did a while ago. edw519's comments seem to stick out for me about technical stuff. Byrneseyeview has delightfully provacative stuff, a little edgy but generally sensible and well thought out. RMS only for the whole getting kicked out thing, it was big enough at the time to stick with me. Nostrademons because I was interested in how his game-clay thing was going to work out. And logicholeflaw because we're old friends irl.

So on the whole it seems like I notice on part expertise part random. I don't vote much though so I don't think name alone gets me to click that up arrow.

There a a few I know from blogs and irc (raganwald, knowtheory, for example). More, I suspect, but I have to see them to recognize them :)

Oddly, though, I don't think I'd recall a name because that person had made good points in previous posts. Not sure why that is.

I read stuff, think, Oh, that's a good point, maybe reply, most likely up-vote, but don't seem to stash the user name any place in memory. Perhaps that's a good thing, as I don't start assuming anything about a post because of name recognition.

Yet on most mailing lists I do tend, over time, to make note of who is offering useful content. Go figure.

Do you mean as individuals outside of HN, or as people particularly worth reading here? If the latter, there's maybe 20 or 30 people whose name will make me stop and read something I might otherwise skip. But I tend to see the comment first and afterwards note 'oh, xxxxx again, of course' My favorites are those with whom I have constructive disagreements, or who'll take time to tell me why I'm wrong about something.

I'm having some problems on giving attention to usernames. Most of the things written over the Internet is anonymous for me. Until I really want to give attention to what is written and if it's a credible resource and check sources. If something is anonymous than it's not credible default. So this leads me to not recall usernames. I'm a bit sorry about this. Avatars would really help me.

Interesting observation regarding avatars, I was planning to include them in a current project... but having less recognizable user accounts might help with getting users to focus on the content.

pg. I regularly visit his threads page. I wonder if he thinks that's weird.

It's the PG microblog.

Relatively new here. I don't really recognize a lot of names and tend to pay less attention to names here than in other environments. This is in part for reasons others have mentioned: There are no avatars and there are no signature blocks. The design here is more minimalist than anything else I have participated in. I am still getting used to it and not really in a position to make a judgment call about whether the orange dot (lack of visible scores) is a "good" change or a "bad" one. My general impression is that pecking order matters less here than on most discussion sites. My general feeling is that is a good thing. I hate the Lord of the Flies stuff that is so common in online groups.

Mine are mostly topical, e.g. tptacek and cperciva for security, ice799 for systems stuff, etc.

I subscribe to a few comment feeds via searchyc so that I can read most of the comments from my favorites around here.

I had no idea I could subscribe to just the edw comments. Thanks!

-- You mean experiment of not showing comment ratings?

I remember a few name Gruesome, mechanical_fish ... but I'd recognize more if saw them in context.

But I don't a moderate in the basis of names I know anyway...

It seems like this experiment will make people in general less likely to moderate. I used to moderate highly rated posts on opinion and less highly rated posts on quality. I now moderate everything on opinion but I suspect others are more self-censored - my guess comes because I haven't had any up or down moderations recently...

Sorry. Typo. fixed.

PG, 'cos he's PG.

tdavis, because he was memorable on IRC.

patio11, because Jesus that guy posts like an inferno.

jrockway, who I think I've argued with more than anybody save amichail, who I also recognize.

edw519, because duh.

Probably some other people.

mechanical_fish

(edw, patio, cperciva, mattmaroon, 100 others, but if you asked me for one name that typified the whole place, to free associate, I'd say mechanical_fish).

edw, dcurtis, patio, pg, dhouston, sama, dfranke, rms, nickb, ryanwaggoner, tptacek, cperciva, jacquesm, pclark, jgrahamc, jasonlbaptiste, wheels.

all of these people have at one point posted a comment that made me go hmm... that was thoughtful and well written. who is this person? prolific posters had a higher chance to be on this list because they had more posts (duh).

and nostrademons because i loved reading the diffle blog

can't believe you said my name. really? thanks alot. means tons.

Another thought:

The way that racist comments and other trolls generally get a minus -4 is useful. Having an indication that the community in general abhors a particular unfortunate comment is very useful in this case (though over -4's have seemed completely mean and unjustified).

I hope such comments still are going to get some 'deprecated' indicator...

I'm relatively new to HN, and I am not in favor of the hiding of points on comments. One of the reasons I am here is because of the trust that was created in seeing that the community as a whole actually values (and devalues) the same things I do. If I were to discover HN now, that kind of information about the community is no longer available.

pg and nickb are the only ones that I can remember that I recognize without taking a look at other posts.

Right now, only PG.

But there were times I remember some people by name when certain discussions were going on.

I can remember some usernames when I see. and mixmax I can remember you :) for some reason.

PS: And If we had avatars on HN, things will be far different. But anyway HN is better this way IMHO.

jacquesm has been pretty on the ball lately. rokhayakebe seems like a good guy. paul (Buchheit) offers a lot of karma per word. Initally, I liked PG's style of writing: really good style for business plans.

PG. Not sure why :-)

mechanical_fish

Pretty much just the other's people have mentioned. Maybe it would be alright to include a one or two line signature now to help differentiate everyone and to promote their work.

I don't like that idea. Part of what makes Hacker News great is the forced absence of comment self-promotion/signatures and a extremely high focus on what's being said rather than who says it.

Anecdotally, if I find myself particularly interested in what someone says I'll visit their profile to learn more about them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com