I was thinking about this earlier today, do people post something to get the points or they want HN to be an actual news site for learning. The epiphany came when I posted a link for a WSJ about the top 10 American Kennel Club breeds. After about 10 minutes of thinking, I realized I didn't want HN to be a place where this stuff was promoted (the link seemed liked it belong more on Reddit).<p>How I see HN is my news feed into tech and science - it doesn't have to be the most sensational news you see on CNN nowadays. I just want a place where I can learn from the users and the insightful observations they have.<p>My question is this: How do HN submitters find that right balance between an article that is both popular and insightful?
In addition to the pursuit of points, I think to many it's a challenge to see if they've got the intelligence to identify something provocative to the masses and get the scoop on the item.<p>Also, and I'm going out on a limb here, maybe people submit to seek reassurance that their taste in tech news isn't too deviant when their submissions get traction, or a right of passage to consider themselves a legitimate "hacker" who earned the respect of people apparently smarter than the slashdot crowd, but more energetic than the kuro5hin gang.<p>Or out of narcissism maybe, a desire to be at the helm steering what thoughts a bunch of people shall focus on at a given time.