the only thing I'm 100% sure is valueless and off-topic is the "this is off-topic" comment that
Actually, I'm not even sure about that. It seems to me that the average opinion here is in favour of most posts being about technical/startup topics, but that it's good to have a few interesting posts that fall outside that category - provided they don't overwhelm the 'normal' content of the site.
In that case, then, the comments saying "This is off-topic" - and the degree to which they are voted up - provide a barometer: They indicate to what extent people feel that the 'off-topic' posts are: a) Low in quality, b) drowning out 'normal' tech/startup content. This, in turn, provides social pressure to reduce the number (and increase the quality) of 'off-topic' submissions.
(Of course, you then hit a form of Giles's paradox of social news sites: the people most likely to submit to this social pressure may be the ones with the most interesting 'off-topic' links to share)
Damn data. How dare it not conform to my preconceptions?
That said, what I was trying to express was my feeling that the poll options you chose don't tell the whole story, because you only offered "Startups and CS, no exceptions" and "anything goes".
My contention is that if there were an option for "I like seeing other interesting articles, but keep a pretty strong CS/startup focus", it would be the clear winner. I could be wrong, but the poll as stands doesn't tell us one way or the other.
Actually, I'm not even sure about that. It seems to me that the average opinion here is in favour of most posts being about technical/startup topics, but that it's good to have a few interesting posts that fall outside that category - provided they don't overwhelm the 'normal' content of the site.
In that case, then, the comments saying "This is off-topic" - and the degree to which they are voted up - provide a barometer: They indicate to what extent people feel that the 'off-topic' posts are: a) Low in quality, b) drowning out 'normal' tech/startup content. This, in turn, provides social pressure to reduce the number (and increase the quality) of 'off-topic' submissions.
(Of course, you then hit a form of Giles's paradox of social news sites: the people most likely to submit to this social pressure may be the ones with the most interesting 'off-topic' links to share)