Ask HN: Why the Hacker News community is always hating on new ideas?

People choose to Show HN specifically because they know appreciation isn't automatic here. They don't just want a pat on the head, they want to know if they're doing it right.

Often, learning that your idea simply isn't valuable to others (or even worth their time) is very helpful and motivating towards future development.

I do think there's room to ask that people's so-called negative comments at least be detailed, but this goes for positive/supportive comments too, in my opinion. I don't want to just be told to keep trying, I want help thinking about what exactly to try next.

And frankly for me the new trends seems to be asking the question - "Why does HN hate X?" with X being blockchain, Tesla, etc take your pick. This kind of negative questioning leads to two conclusions:

If HN does actually hate X, then it turns into a public shaming. And no one on the internet admits they are doing anything wrong. So, good luck trying to talk sense.

If HN doesn't hate a topic, then you are implying that even simple comments are hateful. And slowly things will turn against your topic of choice.

The more active HN users, with the support of the moderators, are quite vigilant about downvoting or flagging nasty comments.

Can you give any examples of nasty or mean comments that appear high up in the comment thread and/or without being faded or flagged?

The whole idea of Show HN is to encourage people to build interesting things and get feedback to help them improve their project and/or skills. So, constructive criticism should be welcomed whereas meanness should be weeded out any time it appears.

If you're seeing mean comments in Show HN posts, you should flag and downvote those comments and consider reporting them to the moderators at hn@ycombinator.com.

The question did make me think, whether there's a small part that supports the stereotype(?) of "smart" people, or those working in IT/tech, having less empathy and emotional consideration. Kindness can be seen as unnecessary or even harmful sugar-coating..

[1] http://www.apa.org/monitor/feb06/connection.aspx

[2] https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/17/learning-to-embrace-confli...

I don't want people to be sad or hurt either.

Sometimes it looks like something is opportunistic or scammy. In that case you flag it. If something seems clueless and doesn't seem to have a lot of work or thought behind it I hope people want to help when they level harsh criticism. In these cases people need direction and it's a case where guidance or mentorship might help. It's so important to do this with care.

It takes a somewhat special individual to be able to give helpful criticism, even if he/she thinks it's nonsense.

I think your premise is flawed.

[added] To elaborate: his regular essays were thought-provoking and challenging, in a way that generally drove HN commenters to think and contribute. Nowadays there is a discouraging excess of emoting and belittling, even though the moderators have stepped up their nudges and interventions.

I've realized I have to broaden my news intake as even this community has it's collective blind spots