Thanks, I do feel like though as such one has to create their own standard of what a good show HN means if they don't want to flood show HN or are more interested in having a snowball effect in first place.

Like, not every project should be a show HN and that's okay. One can always create an interesting takeaway from any project and create an article about it and publish it on Hackernews as well.

I think what I get the feeling is to find out how original your idea is. If your idea is really original, you can greatly benefit from SHOW HN. But if not, which is okay as well, creating a normal article might be more correct (if a key takeaway from a project can be established?)

Or would you recommend a seperate place for such instead of Hackernews in this particular context?

> Sometimes it's just a case of "we know it when we see it".

Yes but isn't this also causing the issue where people think that their projects are great and upload show HN and just with AI the amount of projects have grown so large and the signal ratio has just been shrinked impacting real projects as well

I feel as if the people who Submit show Hn needs to ask themselves internally what they would feel about the project without any bias if the project was randomly viewed by them with 0 upvotes, would they ignore or click and read me or upvote and comment and if the project doesn't fit the sense then to not fill SHOW HN with complete garbage AI slop deployed on lovable or something.