Saw that yesterday, and I find it weird.<p>Twitter login and author info, standalone posts (submitted links/stories), and Disqus comments.<p>It feels broken already, using a strange mix of identity from one communication tool and the interface from another ✝.<p>What I like is that by connecting to Twitter and using the USV team's accounts as the source you get a great idea of the character and interests of the VC team and fund.<p>What I dislike is that by opening that up to anyone, the front-page just becomes a mini-HN and the insight into the character of the team is immediately diluted.<p>I also dislike that they use Twitter identity as the author for a conversation/debate, but then use Disqus as the medium for the debate. This has two effects:<p>1) It breaks the feel of the audience, people present themselves slightly differently to different groups, for example how many HN profile pages carry identical info on the individual's Twitter page?<p>2) It splits the debate across Twitter (where some will reply directly to the author) and Disqus.<p>I also find the blog post placement weird. All of the design hints on the blog posts (the grey squares to the right) make me think that they are stories, just "Hot" stories that are being featured. Not the case though, grey squares are blog posts that are masquerading as submitted stories (the design consistency of the block).<p>It's a weird experience overall. I liked the effect that was achieved early-on of gaining insight into what the team are following and debating, but it feels confusing. Ultimately I think the best thing to do is just to follow interesting people on Twitter to gain this insight, follow trends and interests.<p>✝ Should probably be pointed out that Twitter and Disqus are both portfolio companies of USV, and perhaps that's why they chose to do this weird mashup. Makes me wonder about the comedy gold or real opportunities that might be achieved from mashups of other portfolio company offerings. Code academy lessons that start where you left off, every time you get a cab using Hailo?
None of the links off the main page seem to work.<p>Honestly, the page looks pretty decent. It seems less of a clone of HN, than just a page where you can comment and vote on links, which frankly, wasn't a concept created by Hacker News.
HN has been going downhill for a long time; while I think the YC team know this it's not something that they have had time to try and improve.<p>Voting rigging is the norm, companies flag posts about their competitors, there's zero transparency about moderation or flagging. The community has become a lot more negative, less supportive and less startupy.<p>There have been a number of attempts to build HN clones/rivals but generally the people creating them have focused on the technology rather than the community which is the important thing. USV is someone who could potentially build a great community and we should applaud them for trying.
I don't see this as an HN clone. If anything is a clone, HN is a clone of Slashdot->Digg->Reddit. Not that I think any of these sites have an exclusive claim to a threaded discussion board.
AAARGH.<p>Who edited the title? You just took a discussion of how this was a clone of HN website and half way through turned into... into what exactly?<p>The submission was about USV and HN designs being similar, not that USV got new design. You just nuked the context. Seriously, mods, get your shit together.
I wouldn't call it a HN clone. It's not like HN was an original idea - it's just a news voting site (Reddit, Digg etc.) with a specific niche. The important part of each of these sites is the community, not the idea.
I just registered using Twitter and submitted a post of my own content. Seems to work, although I'm curious if it will get deleted since I'm not cool enough to associate up-and-center with the venture crowd.<p>Unlike HN, you <i>must</i> submit text in the body of a submission. Which is somewhat redundant.
This is an attractive design and it's always good to have another place to discuss things.<p>My biggest problem, on first impressions, is that the design gives the most emphasis to the least important part: the submitter. What I love about HN and Reddit is that I can get through someone's 600-word comment and be thoroughly enlightened or angered and not care or even notice that it was authored by tptacek or some long-time lurker with just 50 karma. It's only because I've read HN frequently that I quickly associate tptacek's handle (if I stop to look at the handle) with having karma...otherwise, he's just some other commenter with something very insightful or aggravating to read...HN's design rightfully de-eephasizes the authority given by identity to a comment and submission, letting the content stand for itself. This is the exact opposite the USQ forum's current design, with Twitter handles overpowering everything else, even the already too-large and boldened headlines.<p>Edit: I don't mind the use of Twitter handles. I think the avatars should be axed, though, and perhaps the handles should be moved to the far right so that the user has to read the headline before being able to notice the submitter name. Yes, I realize this would make it very close to a "HN ripoff" but big deal...copy the best parts of HN.
USV.com post about this HN post: <a href="http://www.usv.com/posts/union-square-ventures-new-website-is-an-hn-clone" rel="nofollow">http://www.usv.com/posts/union-square-ventures-new-website-i...</a>
I think it's okay to be an HN "clone". They're taking a clearly successful model and using it for a community. And it's an <i>existing</i> community, which makes it all the more workable. Kudos!<p>Disclaimer: I "cloned" HN when making <a href="http://lifestyle.io" rel="nofollow">http://lifestyle.io</a>. I didn't have a preexisting community, but a small handful of people find it useful. Is there a lot of overlap in content? Sure. Do I discover stuff I might have missed on HN? Yep.<p>I just wish I were a better community organizer.
Wow. I just hope their EIR didn't come up with this. Otherwise I would feel very disappointed.
What surprise me is the lack of identity.
Why? Why would they even want to do this? They are USfuckingV. One of the most aspirational and important funds and yet they do this. Meh.
Instead of us posting stuff on their WhateverTheyCallNewsSite we should be reading them and learning how to do stuff.
"What's going on?!<p>Not your fault, we're experiencing a server error. Try again in a moment!
Fail-Fred "<p><i>face plam</i> thats all I get when I click on comment.
Brad Feld already tried starting a HN clone and didn't pan out. <a href="http://tech.co/brad-feld-startup-revolution-hub-2012-12" rel="nofollow">http://tech.co/brad-feld-startup-revolution-hub-2012-12</a><p>I don't think USV's case is any different.
Very weird approach by one of the most recognized and respected venture firms in the industry.<p>Other than connecting people to unique content, I don't really get what's going with the whole redesign and HackerNews-esque feel.
Haha, I liked the old title better, "Union Square Ventures' new website is an HN clone". Much more informative and the first thing I thought when I followed the link anyway.
Well, what do you think of this French site : <a href="http://news.humancoders.com/" rel="nofollow">http://news.humancoders.com/</a> ?<p>(not mine)