Submission timeline
2007–2026One slot for every year since HN launched. Height is that year's peak points; orange marks a 100+ point or 50+ comment breakout. Select a bar to open its strongest thread.
First comments on top threads
HN comment orderThis article is taken from Simone Santini[0]'s paper "We are Sorry to Inform You..."[1]. Simone is a major critic of the Semantic Web. Watch this talk by him regarding his opinions on the matter[2]. Also, as some of you might know, Larry and Sergey's paper on the architecture of the Google Search Engine was rejected. It is one of most highly cited tech reports today. [0] http://arantxa.ii.uam.es/~ssantini/ [1] https://noppa.aalto.fi/noppa/kurssi/mat-1.2991/materiaali/Mat-1_2991_6._rsa-kommentteja.pdf [2]…
Are these real historical peer reviews, or is this fiction? To me, the peer reviews look like something you might get from a reviewer today, but I'm certain the Einstein's performance review linked on the very top is fiction.
The first top-level comment from each of the four biggest threads, in HN’s own order. Excerpts are shortened; open a comment for full context.
- Breakout years
- 2
- Total points
- 287
- Total comments
- 103
100+ points or 50+ comments
reference only — not used in Hall rules or ranking
reference only — not used in Hall rules or ranking
Every submission
| Date | Title as submitted | By | Points | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2012-01-21 | We are sorry to inform youFirst breakout · Best thread | iamabhi9 | 185 | 52 |
| 2019-05-22 | Rejections of Famous Papers (2006) | mathgenius | 4 | 0 |
| 2020-08-22 | We Are Sorry to Inform You (2005) | tosh | 1 | 0 |
| 2022-06-16 | We Are Sorry to Inform You (2005)Latest 20+ point return | OJFord | 97 | 51 |