I've been thinking quite a bit recently on the subject of online forums; namely, why do they seem to inevitably deteriorate into a desperate, trolling flame-fest? More to the point, how can this be prevented? What can be learned from other forms of group communication, such as scientific journals?
The author makes a point that I hadn't really thought much about; namely, that observing the mayhem is itself entertaining to a large number of people, which in turn drives site owners to, at the very least unconsciously, permit nearly uncontrolled ass-hattery, in exchange for eyeballs and advertising revenue.
JoS seems to have maintained a decent signal-to-noise ratio; let's hope that Hacker News manages to do so as well.
I've noticed that forums I frequent that have high signal-to-noise ratios fall into two camps (with some overlap):
1. Niche topic. For example, I frequent forums about Go and salsa dancing that have next to zero noise. The trick I think is keeping the focus narrow: the programming reddit has worked rather well, technology-in-general forums have become cess pools.
2. Strictly moderated. It seems the only way to maintain a non-niche forum is to aggressively counteract unthinking contributions ("me too" posts, Internet memes) and trolls. Having a sanctioned area to vent and flame in, to keep the main area focused on serious (or at least on-topic) discussion may also help. The Ars Technica forums and The Straight Dope Message Board come to mind.
The dynamic on social news sites is a bit different than a traditional forum, however. Different tactics may be required to keep things in check.
Part of it's expectation setting by the core group of users.
Part of it is the same as in "Average Down" hiring. I.e., as a community grows out of the early adopters, the cluefulness/etc. of the average user will drop. A given community can only effectively support a certain rate of newbies and still be able to absorb and inculcate them into community (or drive them away :-).
The author makes a point that I hadn't really thought much about; namely, that observing the mayhem is itself entertaining to a large number of people, which in turn drives site owners to, at the very least unconsciously, permit nearly uncontrolled ass-hattery, in exchange for eyeballs and advertising revenue.
JoS seems to have maintained a decent signal-to-noise ratio; let's hope that Hacker News manages to do so as well.