Ask HN: What do you think of self-promotion on HN?
When I write something about something, I'm always tempted to submit it on HN. Is it a bad idea? Do you consider it being promotion for loosers? Should I wait (and hope) that someone else will submit it?
32 comments
Dude.
You're on a board ran by somebody who wrote books and articles about hacking. Every time any of us posts, we're helping somebody else self-promote somewhere down the road.
Life is self-promotion. I can't read a zillion articles looking for you. If you write something we might like, go for it. I want to read it.
I'd much rather have people write and submit their own article than the usual crap we get where one famous person writes something (usually a rant) and the crowd gathers around and cheers. Celebrity does not equal potential relevance -- you might have great ideas to submit on subject X that we'll never hear about unless you submit.
In fact, given my druthers, I'd limit the number of articles we could see from famous writers to only so many per week. After a while, it all starts to look like so much noise. Fresh voices welcome.
You're on a board ran by somebody who wrote books and articles about hacking. Every time any of us posts, we're helping somebody else self-promote somewhere down the road.
Life is self-promotion. I can't read a zillion articles looking for you. If you write something we might like, go for it. I want to read it.
I'd much rather have people write and submit their own article than the usual crap we get where one famous person writes something (usually a rant) and the crowd gathers around and cheers. Celebrity does not equal potential relevance -- you might have great ideas to submit on subject X that we'll never hear about unless you submit.
In fact, given my druthers, I'd limit the number of articles we could see from famous writers to only so many per week. After a while, it all starts to look like so much noise. Fresh voices welcome.
If it is relevant to hackers, submit it. And then let the 'upmod' gods do their thing.
Yes, it's ok to submit your own stuff. If you get to the point where you've submitted 20 things and none of them got any upvotes, though, you may want to start to be more selective.
I'll second this. If you feel it is fitting for HN, then it's perfectly fine to submit it yourself.
There are no rules against that, and if you put in the work to write a thought-provoking piece, it deserves attention.
There are no rules against that, and if you put in the work to write a thought-provoking piece, it deserves attention.
No gods. Click the 'New' link at the top of the screen.
I think it depends, but I have no problem with self submission (disclaimer - I've submitted 2 articles myself from my site in the past 6 months, one today).
I would prefer others submit them, but until the community is large enough and my site's following also large enough, I'll submit my own content if I think it is good and relevant to HN. I tend to err on the side of caution though, since HN is a pretty tight and specific community.
I would prefer others submit them, but until the community is large enough and my site's following also large enough, I'll submit my own content if I think it is good and relevant to HN. I tend to err on the side of caution though, since HN is a pretty tight and specific community.
When I write something about something, I'm always tempted to submit it on HN. Is it a bad idea?
Please do. I would much rather read what you have to say and provide some advice than read yet another frikkin' article on how Obama's new toilet is now Internet-capable and just cleared for top-secret access by the NSA.
Ask-HN posts are often some of best threads on this site: http://top.searchyc.com/commented
Please do. I would much rather read what you have to say and provide some advice than read yet another frikkin' article on how Obama's new toilet is now Internet-capable and just cleared for top-secret access by the NSA.
Ask-HN posts are often some of best threads on this site: http://top.searchyc.com/commented
All the world's a stage, even hacker news.
Go for it - it will get downmoded if its junk, as hacker news is one of the few bullshit freezones left.
Submissions can't get downmodded...
Submissions can be downmodded. This ability is limited to senior members of the community, as measured by karma score. When you are logged in, your karma score is in parentheses next to your user name, upper right corner of the screen.
I was at one point #2 in karma score and have never been able to downmod submissions.
There's a karma threshold for downmodding comments.
There's a karma threshold for downmodding comments.
I've tried it a few times. Submitted an article I thought would be interesting to people (along the lines of "check out this small program and talk about its virtues/problems"), especially compared to the steady stream of "I'm said ... this is why ... boo hoo" articles that had become prevalent.
I'd say don't get discouraged when the articles you submit gets no upvotes and Google Analytics tells you that nobody even clicked the link. I wish I could follow that advice.
But there's probably no problem with submitting your own stuff.
I'd say don't get discouraged when the articles you submit gets no upvotes and Google Analytics tells you that nobody even clicked the link. I wish I could follow that advice.
But there's probably no problem with submitting your own stuff.
The no-one-noticing-good-submissions is seemingly a huge problem here and I think working on fixing that will make HN much better. I emailed PG a few months ago with some ideas I had about how to quantitatively measure submission and discussion quality, but he did not respond. I'll forgive him though, he's been making babies and startups :)
Most submissions are probably good but I guess only a small percentage of users click the new link, and then they can only read a small percentage of submissions and up vote only an even smaller percentage of those. It would be easy for a great submission to fall through the cracks.
That's definitely true, and I'm sure it happens a lot.
What's weird to me, then, is the frequency of crappy submissions getting enough upvotes to hit the front page while the inevitable good submissions slip through. (This, obviously, is bigger than my own submissions, which I'm not particularly interested in seeing on the front page given that I've already seen them -- I'd like to see all the good submissions, and less of the crap.)
What's weird to me, then, is the frequency of crappy submissions getting enough upvotes to hit the front page while the inevitable good submissions slip through. (This, obviously, is bigger than my own submissions, which I'm not particularly interested in seeing on the front page given that I've already seen them -- I'd like to see all the good submissions, and less of the crap.)
Maybe the algorithm should guarantee every new submission gets at least X front-page views for some value of X.
the main reason I'm still here is because of the "review my stuff" posts.
A big reason my site got this nice writeup is because of the "review my stuff" posts here: http://www.louisgray.com/live/2009/01/our-doings-you-upload-...
Can you believe the site they describe is the same one people tore apart here two years ago?
Can you believe the site they describe is the same one people tore apart here two years ago?
I love your question, it's wonderfully circular...
When I write something about something, I'm always tempted to submit it on HN.
It says in the guidelines to do just that: http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
If you want to add initial commentary on the link, write a blog post about it and submit that instead.
It says in the guidelines to do just that: http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
If you want to add initial commentary on the link, write a blog post about it and submit that instead.
If you don't self promote in some way, how will anyone know you're writing something somewhere. :)
Seriously, though, I think this is where the voting comes in and the community will decide if the article is interesting or not.
Seriously, though, I think this is where the voting comes in and the community will decide if the article is interesting or not.
Nobody else will promote you until you promote yourself. If other people on HN don't read your blog or use your product you won't ever make it on here unless you kick start it yourself. Once other people are aware of what you are doing, you'll probably need to self-promote less.
Remember the golden rule, if you give people stuff that's relevant to them, you are giving them something of value It's ok to promote yourself if you do that. If you aren't you are spamming.
Remember the golden rule, if you give people stuff that's relevant to them, you are giving them something of value It's ok to promote yourself if you do that. If you aren't you are spamming.
Hey, it is like Ask HN post. If you think that you are asking a cool question, then, just submit it like you do like now.
Most importantly, you get no penalty on submitting lame stories.(I am not saying that your stories are lame.) And, that's why there are no "down vote" button for stories submission.
Most importantly, you get no penalty on submitting lame stories.(I am not saying that your stories are lame.) And, that's why there are no "down vote" button for stories submission.
I wholeheartedly support the idea of people self promoting if the articles are of relevance to HN readers.
If I find the article is interesting, I really couldn't care less who submitted it, I'll upvote it anyway. The only time I actually look at the usernames is in the comments anyway.
If I find the article is interesting, I really couldn't care less who submitted it, I'll upvote it anyway. The only time I actually look at the usernames is in the comments anyway.
Actually point in case, it was Paul who submitted his story about "Communicating with code" which currently has about 120 upvotes. Paul is pretty well known in this community but no-one has a problem with him self-submitting.
Unless you submit you will not 'unlearn'. Unlearning is very difficult process altogether.
I think I'm awesome.