Like, the site owners/employees/admins/mods are the only ones who choose what to post(and hopefully not extremely bias and a good spread of topics), but the users can still upvote/downvote the post as well as comment and all that?
I like the aggregation mark down style of these sites, but I am not sure about the curation being purely user based. I am curious if the users having a large majority control of the curation hurts the quality, and I’d like to see comparisons if they exist.
Actually I stumbled onto that one before I posted. I have a new goal in life to get to a level that Hacker News posts are just light reading for me.
For now, most of that is way above my pay grade but I loved the posts I understood ha
There’s a bot that reposts HN content, but I’m not sure if it has its own community. And if it does, I don’t think there’s any restrictions on posting from users.
Edit: There is !hackernews@derp.foo . It doesn’t limit users from posting though, but I don’t see anyone really posting other than the bot anyway.
Yeah, some of them are way too technical for me as well. Only some of the articles end up getting reposted to lemmy though, when I browse directly on hacker news, I tend to find a good mix of articles that are less technical but still interesting.