Thanks -- totally agree that curation is essential, and I suspect my original point may have come across as advocating against curation, which I wasn’t.

My goal isn’t to randomize the homepage or flatten quality, but to involve a broader swath of users in the curation process. It’s currently dominated by the few who browse “new”, essentially a self-selected minority of curators.

Concretely, I was imagining something like: * Every new post is shown to a small % of users as part of their regular homepage (not in a “new” tab they’d have to seek out). * Posts that get engagement from that slice are shown to more users, and so on — a gradual ramp-up based on actual interest rather than early-bird luck.

So it’s not removing filtering; it’s just moving from a binary gate (past the goalpost = homepage) to a more continuous, probabilistic exposure curve.

Curation still happens, but more people get to participate in it, and the system becomes more robust to time-of-day luck or early vote pile-ons.

Anyway, I mostly wanted to clarify that I’m not against filtering -- just having a thought experiment about how we might make it more adaptive and inclusive.

Does that clarify my point? Any thoughts? I appreciate your engagement!

Apologize for the poor formatting in the parent post; I can't edit it now, but here it is as intended:

Thanks -- totally agree that curation is essential, and I suspect my original point may have come across as advocating against curation, which I wasn’t. My goal isn’t to randomize the homepage or flatten quality, but to involve a broader swath of users in the curation process. It’s currently dominated by the few who browse “new”, essentially a self-selected minority of curators.

Concretely, I was thikinking something like:

* Every new post is shown to a small % of users as part of their regular homepage (not in a “new” tab they’d have to seek out).

* Posts that get engagement from that slice are shown to more users, and so on — a gradual ramp-up based on actual interest rather than early-bird luck.

So it’s not removing filtering; it’s just moving from a binary gate (past the goalpost = homepage) to a more continuous, probabilistic exposure curve. Curation still happens, but more people get to participate in it, and the system becomes more robust to time-of-day luck or early vote pile-ons.

Anyway, I mostly wanted to clarify that I’m not against filtering -- just having a thought experiment about how we might make it more adaptive and inclusive.

Does that clarify my point? Any thoughts? I appreciate your engagement!