[HN Gopher] Ask HN: Why is my two day old submit on HN frontpage...
___________________________________________________________________
Ask HN: Why is my two day old submit on HN frontpage shown as 1
hour old?
Why is my two day old submit on HN frontpage shown as 1 hour old?
Here is direct link - it says 1 hour old
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33667439 And in list of my
submits I can see that I've submitted link two days ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=taubek Title of my
submit is Service Resilience -- part 1: Startup Technology
Author : taubek
Score : 27 points
Date : 2022-11-21 17:33 UTC (5 hours ago)
| mooreds wrote:
| Also of interest and related is the second chance pool:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/pool
|
| Posts here don't get pushed on to the front page, but have some
| level of vetting and are placed on that list to see if the
| community thinks they should be voted up.
| _Microft wrote:
| Sooner or later submissions in the second chance pool are
| actually placed roughly into the middle of the frontpage and
| given a few extra upvotes for that. The community reaction to
| them decides their further fate.
| mooreds wrote:
| Huh. TIL. Thanks for letting me know.
| mtmail wrote:
| Yes, that feature is confusing. It's called a 'second chance' and
| explained here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26998308
| taubek wrote:
| Thank you! But why does it change the timestamp?
| lzooz wrote:
| Because it's plain and simple manipulation. If it wasn't
| meant to manipulate the front page it wouldn't alter the
| timestamp.
| Arnavion wrote:
| Yes, and it also changes the timestamps of the user
| comments to perpetuate the illusion.
| taubek wrote:
| Interesting. My submit didn't have comments so I didn't
| notice that :)
| Arnavion wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30937892
| bombcar wrote:
| And just because it's manipulation doesn't mean it's bad
| (in my opinion) - it does what it intends to do and if it
| dies in second chance, it rots away.
|
| Any _good_ community discussion site that maintains for
| years needs various forms of "manipulation", and this is a
| pretty minor one.
| lzooz wrote:
| Taking arbitrary submissions to the front page manually
| (without the necessary upvotes from users) and on top of
| that manipulating the timestamp so it looks like the
| submission is new and got there organically is bad.
| macintux wrote:
| "Bad" is subjective. Counter to your expectations, sure,
| but "bad" seems a bit of a simplistic take.
| coldpie wrote:
| Nah, I like it. I'm here for interesting news &
| discussion, not for a demonstration of some voting
| algorithm.
| bombcar wrote:
| HN already automatically takes some of the new queue and
| puts it on the front page (there's always a very recent
| few votes link on any given homepage for a logged in
| user) - I see no problem with this at all.
|
| Adding an * footnoting what was done wouldn't serve much
| purpose.
| [deleted]
| jsnell wrote:
| So that people don't complain about a 2 day old post still
| being on the FP.
| loceng wrote:
| SilasX wrote:
| Weird. I personally consider a modified timestamp more
| confusing/worrying than an old post being on the front
| page, as the former modifies something that should be
| immutable, while the latter doesn't.
|
| Edit: Semi-related issue for comparison: one time, a
| contact DMed me on Discord to ask where a certain event was
| going to be held. Before I saw the message, she found the
| answer through other means and thus "helpfully" deleted her
| message to me.
|
| Same problem: that actually makes it _more_ confusing
| because I see inconsistent state: the notification lives on
| in my phone, but it 's no longer present in the chat
| history. Better to just say "never mind" than to modify
| history.
| hutrdvnj wrote:
| I agree. Modifying timestamps for features like in this
| case "second chance" is a very bad practice IMHO.
| wyldfire wrote:
| yeah - split the difference maybe and have the UI
| indicate "second chance" somehow.
|
| but I suppose HN likes to keep things simple (even if
| it's a bit confusing).
| cma wrote:
| The algorithm uses timestamp with a kind of gravity
| calculation to make it fall off the page. They maybe just
| didn't want to have a separate display timestamp and second
| chance timestamp in the codebase and it was simpler to change
| it when reupping a post.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-11-21 23:02 UTC)