Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Odds of any given submission or story landing is highly variable and arbitrary.

I land a fair bit of content on the front page, but also submit a lot. Many of my successful items are surprises, much of what I'd like to see take hold doesn't. I'll submit certain ‘beats‘ of interest regularly (different items), hopefully without becoming too polemical. I also scan 'new' upvoting items of interest frequently. I'll nominate items from others for the 2nd chance queue (email the mods).

The Assange story is complex, has always been inherently political, and those politics have dhifted, as has awareness of interactions and consequences. Assange was always controversial. Many who'd once admired his work, and who can point to specific good acts and valuable releases, are also now skeptical of his intentions and connections. Myself among them.

But items concerning him and his case(s) can still be submitted.



> highly variable and arbitrary

I think it might be that a few upvotes around submission time might be the deciding factor.

It would be interesting if there was an algorithm that would statistically separate upvotes from "number of eyeballs on the site" somehow.

maybe something like:

- 100 people saw this subject - maybe toward top of page = more likely count as "see" - of that x% upvoted it - make it more visible




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: