Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin
Adventures in “Elder Delurking”
6 points by onecommentman on Jan 1, 2021 | hide | past | favorite | 5 comments
Lurked on forums like this for 40 years. Every decade I’d post for a while. There are folks my age still sharp enough to contribute on a platform like this. Should we?

My findings:

1. Stay anonymous - there is zero upside to IDing yourself, and major downside. No email, no personal identifiers, fuzz up your stories (as if we need help). Anonymous means you won’t become a target or an intimidation.

2. Post but don’t discuss - one and done. When you engage, you will enrage...yourself. Don’t read any responses. If you’re wrong on details, let the youngsters clean it up. It’s more about making an intellectual market than building a grand cathedral.

3. Upvotes aren’t your friend - don’t “manage” an online persona. Upvote totals show if the voters think you’re OK. Or you share the core values of their cult. Hard to tell sometimes. Channel your inner rebel, and model orthogonality for the young.

4. Keep it positive and kind - your race is almost done, their race has only just begun.

5. Critique, but keep to specifics - and support your criticisms with facts. Wise saws and modern instances. You have the time for it.

6. Perhaps a nice group activity - fun to discuss together a shared response. Easier to ignore downvotes.

The kids need training on critical thinking. There aren’t the cultural taboos against eye-rolling rhetorical devices. Probably because there is no common formal education requirement for rhetoric and media studies in high school. More projection (“this is that, thus saith me”) and “soiled diaper” (“here’s a problem...why isn’t someone else fixing it”) posts/comments, rather fewer facts.

It boils down to the moderators. They do OK here.

Now to return to lurking. Can I contribute my upvotes to charity? Need to get back to that book by sudo-Macarius...



Righteous post... "post but don't discuss"... if the discussion is not aligned with what motivated you to post, whether to reply is a wholly separate bar. It's often useful to ask yourself, "what's the best that could happen here..."... and if the best is nothing useful, just walk away. Some guy in emotional turmoil being "corrected" won't help them and readers can judge where they're coming from already. So you won't have to followup, link to your sources in your original post where possible.

"Upvotes aren't your friend"... one way to look at it is your balance of upvotes is your reputation capital, once you have enough, you can afford to spend some posting against the prevailing wisdom when you judge you should, without being silenced.


> "Upvotes aren't your friend"... one way to look at it is your balance of upvotes is your reputation capital, once you have enough, you can afford to spend some posting against the prevailing wisdom when you judge you should, without being silenced.

Compensating for the downvotes, you mean.

Good point. HN downvotes used to be annoying but now I chalk it to the silent revolt of the intellectually incurious. And others.

It’s not specific to HN, but to most groups that seem to consider themselves ‘intellectual’. The downvoting of certain subjects(I have a list. It’s very predictable.) is a subconscious upvote to their ego. That’s why it’s anonymous.

Also: I agree with the initial point re being anonymous, I don’t think that’s possible on HN because the YC applications are tied to user handle. So there is some form of self censoring going on. Because. Image.


I'd generally agree, but it pains me to see how much pre-2000 info. seems to get lost. Even worse, is when it's 're-discovered' losing all the lessons learned about it, or failing to credit the original pioneers.

Computer Science didn't spring up fully formed on 1/1/00 ... :-)


Thanks for this post. Agree with all the points.


great post. thank you for the wisdom.




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

Search: