I generally find the bias against recruiters here to be a bit narrow minded and short sighted. Yes, they're a pain. Yes, most are idiots misrepresenting themselves from the first second they talk to me.
But I'm all about increasing interactions. Not restricting them based on race, gender, or having a unfortunate job title like "recruiter."
I'd rather let in 500 crappy posts than turn away a single valuable newcomer to HN. Has upvote/downvote truly proven inadequate for moderating this particular thread?
I'd rather not have 500 crappy posts for every single valuable post. The former starts detracting from the site and ultimately decreases quality. You'll eventually reach a breaking point where everything is being drowned in the noise. Downvoting only works if you're an active enough participant, especially when it comes to the who is hiring posts many probably have minimal or zero participation.
But I'm all about increasing interactions. Not restricting them based on race, gender, or having a unfortunate job title like "recruiter."
I'd rather let in 500 crappy posts than turn away a single valuable newcomer to HN. Has upvote/downvote truly proven inadequate for moderating this particular thread?