three years of ranking threads, summarised so you do not have to read them
three years of ranking threads, summarised so you do not have to read them — a position I have arrived at slowly and would like tested. Submissions older than a year are archived: readable, linkable, and closed to new comments. That keeps a three-year-old thread from being reopened with a reply nobody will see in…
Feed position is a function of early votes and time. That structurally favours agreeable early answers over correct late ones, which is why sorting by controversial occasionally is worth the effort.
The ranking functions are published: the hot ordering combines score magnitude with age, and the controversial ordering weights total volume by the balance between up and down votes. Both are reproducible from the numbers on each submission.
Cosigning on the no-links rule. It is the only reason the pricing threads are trustworthy.
Careful — that would make individual moderation cases public by default, which is worse for the person complaining.
Vendor source pages carry an outbound link to the supplier’s own storefront, marked nofollow and sponsored, disclosed on the page and again on the funding page. Nothing is received for it.
Have you taken this to modmail first?
removals get explained publicly where the rule allows it
modmail first, always, and the thread second
Small fix — archiving happens at a year, not at six months. It is in the published policy.
rule-change proposals need a concrete wording, not a complaint
nobody here is paid, including the moderators