undefined | Better HN

0 pointsktta8y ago0 comments

For some reason I think this going to happen to HN too, and I feel it is at 3. And I'm not sure if I'm in group #1 or group #2.

0 comments

9 comments · 4 top-level

nathanm4128y ago· 2 in thread

I think it's been at step 3 for longer than most sites have last. I know I'm part of group 2, but I've seen a somewhat consistent culture since I arrived over five years ago.

kttaOP8y ago

Looks like you joined about 5 1/2 years ago. I'm surprised you think you're part of Group #2.

Before what date do you think people can be group #1? Or are you ascribing the group number to contributions rather than date of joining?

stingrae8y ago

When a friend first recommended hackernews to me it didn't show up in google searches. So I gave up. I think techcrunch finally led me to finding it. By the time I actually created an account(just 10 days before nathan^), people were already complaining about the deterioration of the community, so I assumed I was in group 2.

2 more replies

brandnewlow8y ago· 2 in thread

I, along with a lot of people, joined HN in 2008 after Techcrunch wrote about it. That's pretty close to "Group 2 joins" and yet 9 years later HN persists!

Alex39178y ago

I get the feeling a lot of group #1 left in between 2010 and 2012. There are still tons of folks here who made accounts on day one, but a lot of the more conservative or libertarian leaning folks seem to have migrated to other communities around that time.

kttaOP8y ago

>other communities

lobste.rs ?

boondaburrah8y ago· 1 in thread

I'm definitely in group 2. Possibly in group 3 if that's a thing.

Theodores8y ago

I think I am 'Group 3'. My account is 4 1/2 years old and I was a 'read only' site visitor for a while before that.

So there were the people who got here first, then the people who discovered the site in 2008, which was a long time ago, and have fair claim to being 'group 2'.

So I think 'Group 3' is me. A defining characteristic of 'Group 3' is that goes back to pre-Snowden times, before the truth was known. Kids today must be 'Group 4'.

This reminds me of A Brief History of Who Ruined Burning Man:

https://journal.burningman.org/2016/10/philosophical-center/...

supergreg8y ago

I think there's more keeping things in check here than at ./ when group #2 joined.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

9 comments · 4 top-level

nathanm4128y ago· 2 in thread

I think it's been at step 3 for longer than most sites have last. I know I'm part of group 2, but I've seen a somewhat consistent culture since I arrived over five years ago.

kttaOP8y ago

Looks like you joined about 5 1/2 years ago. I'm surprised you think you're part of Group #2.

Before what date do you think people can be group #1? Or are you ascribing the group number to contributions rather than date of joining?

stingrae8y ago

2 more replies

brandnewlow8y ago· 2 in thread

I, along with a lot of people, joined HN in 2008 after Techcrunch wrote about it. That's pretty close to "Group 2 joins" and yet 9 years later HN persists!

Alex39178y ago

kttaOP8y ago

>other communities

lobste.rs ?

boondaburrah8y ago· 1 in thread

I'm definitely in group 2. Possibly in group 3 if that's a thing.

Theodores8y ago

I think I am 'Group 3'. My account is 4 1/2 years old and I was a 'read only' site visitor for a while before that.

So there were the people who got here first, then the people who discovered the site in 2008, which was a long time ago, and have fair claim to being 'group 2'.

So I think 'Group 3' is me. A defining characteristic of 'Group 3' is that goes back to pre-Snowden times, before the truth was known. Kids today must be 'Group 4'.

This reminds me of A Brief History of Who Ruined Burning Man:

https://journal.burningman.org/2016/10/philosophical-center/...

supergreg8y ago

I think there's more keeping things in check here than at ./ when group #2 joined.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse