Ask HN: What are other minimal, all-content, no-frills discussion sites like HN?
92 comments
If people haven't tried looking for smaller subreddits or more controlled subreddits then I'd highly encourage them to. Reddit may have a huge amount of low effort content and frankly highly disturbing content, but some of the subreddits are absolutely fantastic. I'm not really into history but https://reddit.com/r/askhistorians is a treasure trove of fascinating information, with well sourced and detailed answers to the kind of questions non-history buffs might want to ask.
Reddit, with good moderation, is a world apart from what you see if you visit the main page.
On a side note, it's also a great place to go and see discussions around things you highly disagree with. It might help to understand the motivations of "the other side".
Reddit, with good moderation, is a world apart from what you see if you visit the main page.
On a side note, it's also a great place to go and see discussions around things you highly disagree with. It might help to understand the motivations of "the other side".
I don't know about the quality of moderation in r/AskHistorians however.
I read a recent answer there whose first sentence was the opposite of reality. Thinking of how I could demonstrate this easily and effectively, where any person could follow up easily and see what's right, I posted a comment saying it contradicted the second sentence of the Wikipedia article on the topic.
My comment was automatically banned by the auto-moderator because it had a link to Wikipedia and no other links. I tried reading the subreddit rules before posting, but it's pretty hard to find this rule -- indeed, it is not explicitly stated as far as I can tell.
I read a recent answer there whose first sentence was the opposite of reality. Thinking of how I could demonstrate this easily and effectively, where any person could follow up easily and see what's right, I posted a comment saying it contradicted the second sentence of the Wikipedia article on the topic.
My comment was automatically banned by the auto-moderator because it had a link to Wikipedia and no other links. I tried reading the subreddit rules before posting, but it's pretty hard to find this rule -- indeed, it is not explicitly stated as far as I can tell.
> My comment was automatically banned by the auto-moderator because it had a link to Wikipedia and no other links. I tried reading the subreddit rules before posting, but it's pretty hard to find this rule -- indeed, it is not explicitly stated as far as I can tell.
It is at least currently in the subreddit rules page, as linked to on the main site.
"Wikipedia, or any other single tertiary resource, used by itself not a suitable basis for a comment in this subreddit."
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules
In general on reddit, if you've had a comment removed and think it's not right then message the moderators.
It is at least currently in the subreddit rules page, as linked to on the main site.
"Wikipedia, or any other single tertiary resource, used by itself not a suitable basis for a comment in this subreddit."
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules
In general on reddit, if you've had a comment removed and think it's not right then message the moderators.
The comment I was responding to was written by a moderator, who saw my comment and edited their comment to hedge their incorrect claim. They messaged me but my comment was not reinstated.
I don't think that a subreddit that bans links to Wikipedia can be considered a good source of information.
I don't think that a subreddit that bans links to Wikipedia can be considered a good source of information.
This is incredible. Did you spend more than 10 seconds even reading the sidebar?
To post an answer on /r/AskHistorians you have to have a degree in the field in question or proven experience in the field.
I don't think that people who consider Wikipedia the end-all-be-all knowledgebase should be considered for anything.
To post an answer on /r/AskHistorians you have to have a degree in the field in question or proven experience in the field.
I don't think that people who consider Wikipedia the end-all-be-all knowledgebase should be considered for anything.
I did read the sidebar. [The Hacker News guidelines contain the following text: Please don't insinuate that someone hasn't read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that."]
I was not posting an answer. I was correcting an error in an answer, and I thought that showing that it contradicted Wikipedia was productive. (The automated implementation of the subreddit rules disagreed.) I thought it would be great if my comment resulted in either the answer or the Wikipedia article being edited so that they were in line; this objective was vaguely achieved.
I was not posting an answer. I was correcting an error in an answer, and I thought that showing that it contradicted Wikipedia was productive. (The automated implementation of the subreddit rules disagreed.) I thought it would be great if my comment resulted in either the answer or the Wikipedia article being edited so that they were in line; this objective was vaguely achieved.
> I don't think that a subreddit that bans links to Wikipedia can be considered a good source of information.
I don't believe it does as I recently posted a comment with a wikipedia link. It does, however require more authoritative sources than wikipedia, mine did at least have several other corroborating sources. Perhaps the auto-mod is set to remove comments without at least one non-wiki link.
They encourage people who would otherwise have linked just to wikipedia to hunt out the sources that claim comes from and use those instead.
I hope they put in a note in their comment or said thanks at least, I'd hope for more there.
I don't believe it does as I recently posted a comment with a wikipedia link. It does, however require more authoritative sources than wikipedia, mine did at least have several other corroborating sources. Perhaps the auto-mod is set to remove comments without at least one non-wiki link.
They encourage people who would otherwise have linked just to wikipedia to hunt out the sources that claim comes from and use those instead.
I hope they put in a note in their comment or said thanks at least, I'd hope for more there.
Yes, as my post a few back mentioned, I think the automated ban is for comments that include a link to Wikipedia but not elsewhere.
They were nice about things; the PM read "AskHistorians doesn't allow Wikipedia, but .... I clarified in my OP .... Thanks for prompting the clarification!"
They were nice about things; the PM read "AskHistorians doesn't allow Wikipedia, but .... I clarified in my OP .... Thanks for prompting the clarification!"
It's important to think of reddit more like a new Usenet. It's a collection of communities, not one monolithic thing. You find the ones you like and discard the rest. Something like HN could theoretically just be a /r/HN (in fact there is a Hackernews subreddit at https://www.reddit.com/r/hackernews/).
Haha are you a Rick and Morty writer?
I've always thought that a simple HN-like site directed at those of us interested in art, critical theory and literature would be wonderful. Does anybody know of one? I would be interested in helping set one up...
One of the difficulties is that artists and academics tend to be very protective of interesting sources as I think intellectual individuality is much more of a currency than in the tech world.
One of the difficulties is that artists and academics tend to be very protective of interesting sources as I think intellectual individuality is much more of a currency than in the tech world.
I would be interested in this. I come from an art background and many people use aldaily.com to get a sort of curated collection of articles. But adding the voting from HN would be interesting.
That said, you are right that academics are protective. Much of what they are actually interested in is pay-walled as well.
That said, you are right that academics are protective. Much of what they are actually interested in is pay-walled as well.
I once created a HN like alternative - http://tagly.azurewebsites.net/
- Has Tags
- Reputation
- Votes used as favorites
- Permission based roles ( not everyone can see all tags), according to tags --> custom roles or permissions on the topics.
- Personal tag header ( you can pick which tag you want to show in your menu)
- Custom tag based posts ( eg. when you add the tag newsletter, it adds 1 text input named subject, 1 textarea with Html and 1 textarea with text).
- You can hide tags showing, so it's only used as data
- ...
I could add paywall to it, if a post contains a tag named " paywall"
The demo is currently in Dutch though ( titles).
For anyone who wants to try: Demo1:123456 ( user : pass) -- http://tagly.azurewebsites.net/Account/Login?returnUrl=
It's not completely finished though
- Has Tags
- Reputation
- Votes used as favorites
- Permission based roles ( not everyone can see all tags), according to tags --> custom roles or permissions on the topics.
- Personal tag header ( you can pick which tag you want to show in your menu)
- Custom tag based posts ( eg. when you add the tag newsletter, it adds 1 text input named subject, 1 textarea with Html and 1 textarea with text).
- You can hide tags showing, so it's only used as data
- ...
I could add paywall to it, if a post contains a tag named " paywall"
The demo is currently in Dutch though ( titles).
For anyone who wants to try: Demo1:123456 ( user : pass) -- http://tagly.azurewebsites.net/Account/Login?returnUrl=
It's not completely finished though
You should post this as a "Show HN:".
Thanks for the aldaily heads-up! Going on my bookmarks. If you don't already know it, http://conversations.e-flux.com/ is also a pretty decent semi-curated list.
In terms of setting one up, lobste.rs is open source (https://github.com/jcs/lobsters) and could be a good candidate for a starting point...
In terms of setting one up, lobste.rs is open source (https://github.com/jcs/lobsters) and could be a good candidate for a starting point...
If you have interesting content to post and discuss in those areas, please post them to HN! Those definitely qualify as “gratifying one's intellectual curiosity”.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I like the topic boards of 4chan.
The general stuff like /b/, /r9k/ and /pol/ is pretty crappy.
But stuff like /fit/ helped me a lot.
No voting karma crap, just anons posting stuff, read what you like, hide what you hate. the end.
The general stuff like /b/, /r9k/ and /pol/ is pretty crappy.
But stuff like /fit/ helped me a lot.
No voting karma crap, just anons posting stuff, read what you like, hide what you hate. the end.
Agreed. 4chan is a nice antidote to all the karma whoring and gaming of Reddit.
[deleted]
https://barnacl.es/ is similar but targeted to self-funded founders
Hobbyist-hosted niche community forums.
Looking at the alternatives on this thread, I'm glad I've been procrastinating on the right website.
Honestly if you can find some good communities on Slack those are usually great. Unfortunately I don't have any recommendations as I only have private slack teams but if anyone has recommendations that are popular that would be pretty awesome.
A hacker news team would be fantastic!
A hacker news team would be fantastic!
How could anybody find a community on Slack? Are they listed somewhere?
I've seen them posted online. But it would be pretty interesting if there were a way to discover public teams.
yeah I also read it regularly, and highly recommend it if you're into free/libre software
I'd love one for music production. Muffwiggler is the best so far, but it's just an old school messageboard.
All the subreddits seem overly focused on EDM, and entirely without the scientific vibe that HN has.
All the subreddits seem overly focused on EDM, and entirely without the scientific vibe that HN has.
I've heard that Gearslutz is quite good for music production, although I haven't spent much time there myself.
I spent two hours yesterday watching and reading the top posts from https://www.reddit.com/r/oddlysatisfying/top/
Also these subreddits have interesting content : r/science , r/interestingasfuck , r/space , r/food , r/travel , r/earthporn , r/coolgithubprojects , r/iama etc
Also these subreddits have interesting content : r/science , r/interestingasfuck , r/space , r/food , r/travel , r/earthporn , r/coolgithubprojects , r/iama etc
Lainchan usually gets the mention at this point.
I just visited and the top post this month is http://www.metafilter.com/163757/Emotions-are-Work, which was the most anti-male comments I've been exposed to in a while.
The name meta filter implies to me this site wanted to be somewhat neutral and open-ended, but my impression so far is it's become dominated by SJW types, which is going to make it unreadable by me.
The name meta filter implies to me this site wanted to be somewhat neutral and open-ended, but my impression so far is it's become dominated by SJW types, which is going to make it unreadable by me.
It's true that anyone who dismisses people as 'SJW types' is probably going to experience a lot of cognitive dissonance reading metafilter.
Metafilter has a lot of female users that feel safe expressing their opinion and telling their experiences. Not to rag on HN, because generally the discussions here are pretty respectful, but gender diversity at metafilter is one thing I really value about the site.
Metafilter has a lot of female users that feel safe expressing their opinion and telling their experiences. Not to rag on HN, because generally the discussions here are pretty respectful, but gender diversity at metafilter is one thing I really value about the site.
MF is a pay-to-post site, so it is skewed towards people who will pay. It's the same as those small elite colleges where people will study something impractical for an exhorbitant fee. You would
only pay if you agreed with whatever the orthodoxy is. And it becomes self-selecting, and self-perpetuating. The people on MF are the sort of people who would say "OMG I can't believe anyone voted for Trump, because nobody I know did"
MF has a one-time sign-up fee of $5.[0] It's a method of making it less likely that people create fake accounts and for members to value their accounts more. There are some people for whom this fee is beyond what they can pay. For many people, it's a cup of coffee or two, or a beer at a local bar. Yes, it has a gating effect. It'd be interesting to do a more formal study to compare the discussions there with other sites, such as HN, lobste.rs (invite-only), or Reddit.
[0]: http://www.metafilter.com/faq.mefi#1
[0]: http://www.metafilter.com/faq.mefi#1
Just quickly browsing through it, I didn't see anything anti-male. It did strike me that there are many female posters there. Can you point out what you mean specifically?
How about the first sentence, "Women are expected to regulate the emotions of men as well as themselves."
And the first comment, "Anyhow — men who don’t understand their entire emotional range are prone to anger because they can’t meet their own needs."
And the 2nd comment, "I also wonder if that guy wonders if his girlfriends ever had to hire sex workers to manage their emotional needs before they met him."
I don't understand how you can't see it's a one-sided echo chamber.
And the first comment, "Anyhow — men who don’t understand their entire emotional range are prone to anger because they can’t meet their own needs."
And the 2nd comment, "I also wonder if that guy wonders if his girlfriends ever had to hire sex workers to manage their emotional needs before they met him."
I don't understand how you can't see it's a one-sided echo chamber.
What exactly do you object to in any of those three sentences as being sexist? I don't understand what anti-male means to you.
You must be trolling. The entire thread is women finding reasons in everything but themselves at all the possible plights in real life.
Also the idea that women are emotionally regulating 2 people in most relationships is such nonsense that it doesn't even deserve discussion.
Also the idea that women are emotionally regulating 2 people in most relationships is such nonsense that it doesn't even deserve discussion.
There is a type of person who is so oblivious to the plight of others, he thinks any criticism of his privilege[0] is a form of sexism. That is what anti-male means to them.
[0]: (The luxury to be oblivious is itself a manifestation of privilege.)
[0]: (The luxury to be oblivious is itself a manifestation of privilege.)
They are implying that women are better than men.
Making comments about certain kinds of men does not equal "women are better than men". Feel free to mutter "not all men", to yourself, every night.
> Feel free to mutter "not all men", to yourself, every night.
You made a substantive point and then ruined it with a personal attack. Please don't do that—it breaks the HN guidelines and makes the thread even worse. Your comment would be fine with just the first sentence.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
You made a substantive point and then ruined it with a personal attack. Please don't do that—it breaks the HN guidelines and makes the thread even worse. Your comment would be fine with just the first sentence.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
>> Feel free to mutter "not all men", to yourself, every night.
> You made a substantive point and then ruined it with a personal attack.
Can you explain what makes this a personal attack? I support the policy wholeheartedly, but this doesn't seem (to me) to be a violation of it.
I mean, it is mildly rude, but seems a lot closer to "X is left as an excersise for the reader" or "please Read The Friendly Manual", than it is to something like "go fsck yourself" (which would be extremely rude, but still not a personal attack per-se).
Can you explain what makes this a personal attack? I support the policy wholeheartedly, but this doesn't seem (to me) to be a violation of it.
I mean, it is mildly rude, but seems a lot closer to "X is left as an excersise for the reader" or "please Read The Friendly Manual", than it is to something like "go fsck yourself" (which would be extremely rude, but still not a personal attack per-se).
If that's one of the most anti-male comments that you've been exposed to in a while, the internet is a safe space for men.
It seemed to me more of a rationalization for the behavior of abusive men; that the reason they're abusive is because they haven't been "regulated" enough, not because they're selfish, or stupid, or enjoy hurting people. It seems the kind of excuse that women make to excuse men, and to excuse themselves staying with abusive men.
It seemed to me more of a rationalization for the behavior of abusive men; that the reason they're abusive is because they haven't been "regulated" enough, not because they're selfish, or stupid, or enjoy hurting people. It seems the kind of excuse that women make to excuse men, and to excuse themselves staying with abusive men.
I think you make a good point, but just to clarify, I wasn't saying the story was very anti-male. It's that most of the highly rated comments are complaining about men as a group.
Maybe a better phrasing is the highest volume of anti-male comments I've seen in a while.
Maybe a better phrasing is the highest volume of anti-male comments I've seen in a while.
Then don't read it.
Lobsters
https://lobste.rs/
I enjoy reading Lobsters, but the invite-only nature of it has had me sidelined as a passive observer for years and that's frustrating.
Would gladly send you an invite but I need your email for that.
I love lobste.rs but I do have one complaint: The Tags, metadata and noise around the topic titles makes it difficult to scan for interesting topics. HN is so easy to just look down the list and find something interesting to read or discuss.
SSL only, yet SSL error - website doesn't work. A good reason to offer HTTP too.
datatau.com is a good hn-like source for most things AI/data
https://www.physicsforums.com - for, well, physics.
reddit.com is a popular one.
No, it has tons of fillers and memes.
Everybody knows you stay away from the defaults and stay on the smaller subreddits. There are a lot of small, specialized subs that have a great community.
Any examples?
https://www.reddit.com/r/woodworking/
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskCulinary/
The smaller subs have an entirely different culture and community. Any interest you have has a related sub-Reddit. you can search for them by clicking the 'more' link in the top bar that lists the subreddits.
https://www.reddit.com/subreddits/
Subcribe to the ones you like, and unsubscribe from all the defaults.
The smaller subs have an entirely different culture and community. Any interest you have has a related sub-Reddit. you can search for them by clicking the 'more' link in the top bar that lists the subreddits.
https://www.reddit.com/subreddits/
Subcribe to the ones you like, and unsubscribe from all the defaults.
This multireddit: https://www.reddit.com/user/Lapper/m/depthhub/
Also, r/DepthHub collects insightful and researched comments from all across Reddit.
Also, r/DepthHub collects insightful and researched comments from all across Reddit.
I'm not OP, but https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/ is a good example.
Sadly, it seems it is also the only example. Can you name four or five other subreddits that come close?
I always felt like vommiting when I saw people recommend /r/woodworking, but I couldn't figure out why. I was reading an unrelated critique of /r/fitness one day and somebody summed up my feelings about /r/woodworking perfectly
"/r/_______ is a bunch of beginners masquerading as experts."
I always felt like vommiting when I saw people recommend /r/woodworking, but I couldn't figure out why. I was reading an unrelated critique of /r/fitness one day and somebody summed up my feelings about /r/woodworking perfectly
"/r/_______ is a bunch of beginners masquerading as experts."
r/AskScience, r/AskAnthropology, r/TrueFilm, r/DepthHub and r/TrueReddit are those that come to mind. None of these are some perfect, but neither is HN and IMO you find a lot of great content there that you wouldn't find here.
r/Linux and r/Technology are also good ones for those interested in CS and tech stuff.
The top post in /r/linux right now is a link to imgur that is a screen cap of an Amazon question:
Q: Does this keyboard support Linux?
A: The keyboard is advanced but you can not run Linux on the keyboard.
This is probably not what most people think of when they are looking for serious and in-depth Linux discussions.
Q: Does this keyboard support Linux?
A: The keyboard is advanced but you can not run Linux on the keyboard.
This is probably not what most people think of when they are looking for serious and in-depth Linux discussions.
Most of the sports subreddits are great. r/cfb, r/NFL, r/NBA, r/baseball, r/hockey, r/soccer, r/collegebasketball, r/fantasyfootball, etc.
[deleted]
Inbound.org
For those interested in Marketing, SEO, Sales etc.
For those interested in Marketing, SEO, Sales etc.
To answer my own question, I've found voat.co to be a good alternative to reddit. The community is small, but the content is about as great as HN or some good quality sub-reddits.
Reddit!
nntp
Needs an "Ask HN:" in the title.
I tried doing that in the first place, but it goes above 80 characters!
You could shorten your title:
Ask HN: What are other minimal, all content, no frills discussion sites like HN?
Ask HN: What are other minimal, all content, no frills discussion sites like HN?
Go advertise your "just like /r/floobinart but with more zimbledings" sub everywhere to get people to come to it.