Scan all the last day’s post titles.<p>Open links immediately with what I believe to be content-rich credible information and perspective relevant to my background and interests, which are many and varied. Source plays a helpful role in determining whether it’s worth an open, but isn’t the sole determinant. Maybe one in thirty.<p>Read the comments on posts with titles that sound like agitprop, knee-jerkism, marketing or just biased nonsense. Then open the post if<p>1. it isn’t already objectively trashed and<p>2. it is impactfully misleading and<p>3. I may be able to contribute something of substantive value to correct or redirect the post or discussion.<p>Contribute if I can, otherwise silence is Golden. Getting angry at pixels always seemed silly to me...<p>More interested in the meta-analysis of why posts are being posted, and the reasoning (or lack of) underlying the post. Where are we in discussion boards like this in the year 2020: posts, audience, moderation, etc.? I cruised ARPANET and punched cards...so where are we in 2020 on HN as compared to USENET, BBSs, GEnie, Compuserve, The Well, mailing lists, blogs, Reddit...<p>Skip most (but not all) posts on current practice in programming, design, testing, implementation. When I was most active, change control was the brand new concept. I am very old. Open links on legacy systems and ideas.<p>Skip almost all posts with a living or cultish name in them, unless it is someone who just died and I knew of. Will read a post on Bill Gates’s death, but not anything before...of course hoping that will be a long way in the future. It’s all dust in the wind, folks.