replied to a while ago:
I’ve given a lot of thought about that. My thinking was to keep some older nice posts a bit more alive to keep the discussion going. And it works to a percentage. But as it is now with the new conversation views it overlaps a lot with “latest” as the active conversations get bumped to the top anyway, so the current “hot” topics are in latest’s first page naturally. So I might refactor the algorithm a bit to favor top level posts. I think it’s worth it, new users especially discover posts there..
replied to:As long as we're doing this, may I put forth that the "hot" tab runs counter to the principle that removing view counts and timestamps seemed to embody? I'd rather have a "random" tab than a hot. I liked your impulse to design around dopamine rather than at it.