Title: The movements through the world of this individual &quot;don&#x27;t amount to a hill of beans&quot;.<p>Is he on a plane, isn&#x27;t he, will Country X extradite him, won&#x27;t they, does his old girlfriend still pole dance, doesn&#x27;t she, what is Wikileaks&#x27; stance on him, is he allowed to trend on Twitter, etc.<p>The great majority of these stories seem mainly fodder for news companies to gain revenue while people voraciously seek more information about a quickly diminishing story. The documents were released, the hearings have been held, there are some lawsuits pending.<p>But we all know essentially how this will end: Prism isn&#x27;t going away and Edward Snowden&#x27;s fate is grim. And while we can discuss myriad elements &#x27;til we&#x27;re blue in the face, fifteen front-page stories a day aren&#x27;t going to help us understand the issues any better, nor are they coverage of some important event.<p>Let&#x27;s stop turning HN into a tabloid news service and get back to the deeply interesting stories.<p><i>&quot;Essentially there are two rules here: don&#x27;t post or upvote crap links, and don&#x27;t be rude or dumb in comment threads.<p>A crap link is one that&#x27;s only superficially interesting. Stories on HN don&#x27;t have to be about hacking, because good hackers aren&#x27;t only interested in hacking, but they do have to be deeply interesting.<p>What does &quot;deeply interesting&quot; mean? It means stuff that teaches you about the world. A story about a robbery, for example, would probably not be deeply interesting. But if this robbery was a sign of some bigger, underlying trend, then perhaps it could be.<p>The worst thing to post or upvote is something that&#x27;s intensely but shallowly interesting. Gossip about famous people, funny or cute pictures or videos, partisan political articles, etc. If you let that sort of thing onto a news site, it will push aside the deeply interesting stuff, which tends to be quieter.&quot;</i>
Upvote: