It's always going to be obvious which ones are new, because they've got 1 vote and are on the front page.
I read HN all the time, but confess I never visit "new".
I'd definitely be a fan of including 1 random article from "new" for each pageview of the front page -- but make it explicit. Keep it at the top, or in the middle. It seems like that should produce a much "fairer" result.
I'd be curious if there are reasons why this wouldn't work -- why HN, reddit, etc. keep "new" on its own page...
I always visit /new and it's quite astonishing how many great posts never make it to the front page and instead, quietly drop off. This really has a lot to do with what time of day they post as well.
E.G. I've posted around 3AM - 6AM EST (which is usually when I have more free time) and it never makes it. But if I post a bit later, say around 9AM, then it has a much higher chance of coming to the front page.
There are a great many good stories that are several pages into /new and I think (with the exception of a handful that are already on the front page) those are barely seen by the vast majority of HN visitors.
I've found a very strange case of getting better results from posting at off-peak hours. My theory is that my post stays on the first page of "new" long enough for enough people to vote for it. If I post at peak hours, then my post gets pushed off the front page within an hour, meaning too few people have seen it to get it to the front page.
I read HN all the time, but confess I never visit "new".
I'd definitely be a fan of including 1 random article from "new" for each pageview of the front page -- but make it explicit. Keep it at the top, or in the middle. It seems like that should produce a much "fairer" result.
I'd be curious if there are reasons why this wouldn't work -- why HN, reddit, etc. keep "new" on its own page...