Ask HN: Is HN a ‘healthy online community’? I’m doing a case study for a class
It&#x27;s healthier than many other online communities, but that&#x27;s not a terribly high bar to clear.<p>The moderation is reasonably effective against the most extremely toxic content, but IMHO has a tendency to privilege toxic opinions stated in measured tones against the pushback they create.<p>As for member downvotes, I can often predict which comments of mine will attract downvotes: humor will tend to get downvoted as irrelevant, while the relevancy of replies complaining about said humor is rarely questioned.<p>Certain subjects are downvote magnets: Criticism of Elon Musk, scepticism about nuclear power, support for intellectual property rights (especially in the case of music), support for ethnic and gender inclusiveness. It&#x27;s possible, though, that these are just hot button issues, and the opposite opinions also attract downvotes.<p>The technology backing HN is still massively inferior in every respect to what Usenet was 30 years ago. I tend to read each thread only once, and then only follow up discussions of my own comments. Following a thread over several days is a near hopeless endeavor. Why doesn&#x27;t anybody combine the light touch moderation of HN, combined with the tools that a decent newsreader like nn or GNUS could provide?