The whoishiring account does the postings automatically, I'm not sure if that is done from YC/HN or through an outsider but it's a good idea to have only one of these threads.
What bugs me is how every comment in this thread is being downvoted.
Let's not go for malice where being uninformed would do.
I'm pretty well informed about all things HN and I had missed the original thread where the whoishiring policy was established.
What would be good is if a title of 'Who is hiring' would automatically trigger a review or if those postings would be limited to the whoishiring account. And even better still if that were an actual HN/YC supported feature.
I really do believe that HN is poorly designed for end users. The UI is not forward with intent, or pleasurable to use. It's been literally years and the expired link issue hasn't been addressed. ---No, I'll stop you right there. It's been acknowledged as an implementation bug, but not addressed. PG's lack of user empathy and stubbornness make HN worse.
Are you insinuating that the key to dissuading the wrong kind of people is to make Hacker News difficult to use? The notion that good users will "power through" a bad design is dubious at best.
I hope that you're not involved in product design. This thought process is not good for anyone.
I make no apologies for my opinion, however much you dislike it.
I've maintained for years that the key to a high quality online forum is for it to be limited in some way. It can be limited by bugs. Limited by nobody advertising that it exists. Limited by having a very focused topic of discussion. I'm willing to believe that it can be limited by moderation, but I self-select out of those forums so don't know.
But without some sort of limiting you get what happened to Usenet, Slashdot, kuro5hin, the main page of Reddit, and so on. Which is that they became the place that everyone knew that they should go. And then the noise went up faster than the signal, resulting in a poor signal to noise ratio. And then the best people found new forums to go to, and slowly disappeared.
Of course if you make the limiting TOO effective, eventually nobody will be left. There is a balance to be had.
And this only applies to high quality content of the kind that I want to engage with. Which is admittedly not to everyone's taste. It is not a way to make something popular.
I personally find reading HN on a mobile device really frustrating. Horizontal scrolling is awkward and navigating between comments is frustrating. HN isn't winning any awards for UX.
I really do believe that HN is poorly designed for end users. The UI is not forward with intent, or pleasurable to use. It's been literally years and the expired link issue hasn't been addressed. ---No, I'll stop you right there. It's been acknowledged as an implementation bug, but not addressed. PG's lack of user empathy and stubbornness make HN worse.
Actually, you're the one who missed the point entirely (of my comment). I'm questioning the factual accuracy of an article in which the author claims to have gotten an A in his AP English class the senior year of high school, despite the fact that he still can't spell the word "straight" correctly. Either he's lying, or his teacher had very low standards. The former is much more likely.
I also question his interest in writing correctly, as all he would have had to do was to paste his article into Word and it would have told him that he was spelling "straight" incorrectly. The fact that he didn't even bother to do that is an even bigger concern.
There's also the fact that, rather than bothering to come up with a proper response to my initial point, you decided to attack me by calling me "very rude" and making (incorrect) assumptions about why I responded to this article. That also makes you very difficult to take seriously. Don't bother to respond until you can do so in a civilized tone.
Just going to go ahead and say it, strait is a word as is straight. The article was titled "Please Excuse my Grammar" and misusing a word is a grammar (not spelling mistake). That also seems to be part of the point of the article, did you read the last line?
The author wanted to misuse grammar to bring attention to the fact that the education system doesn't support learning. Instead the system labels individuals and attempts to keep them in those labels, rather than helping them improve.
