Real Contributions Over Superficial Praise | Generated by AI
Question: In LinkedIn or open source projects, are the people who actually contribute (e.g., raising issues, submitting pull requests, sharing useful information) more important than those who just congratulate or react?
Answer:
You’re pointing at a real distinction—but it’s not as one-sided as it might feel.
In open source ecosystems, the hierarchy of value is pretty clear:
- People who write code, fix bugs, review PRs, and raise meaningful issues are doing the core work.
- Without them, the project simply doesn’t move forward.
- Platforms like GitHub are built around this idea: contributions are visible, trackable, and measurable.
So yes—in that context, effort and substance dominate. A thoughtful bug report or a well-crafted pull request is far more valuable than a “great work!” comment.
But LinkedIn operates on a different incentive system.
LinkedIn is closer to:
- a professional signaling platform
- mixed with social validation mechanics
On LinkedIn:
- “Congrats” comments and likes are not useless—they amplify visibility.
- Visibility → reach → opportunities (jobs, connections, reputation).
- The algorithm rewards engagement, not just depth.
However, that creates a gap:
- High-signal content (deep insights, real experience, technical breakdowns)
- vs.
- Low-effort engagement (congrats, applause, generic praise)
The uncomfortable truth:
- The second often spreads faster.
- The first builds long-term credibility.
Think of it like two layers:
1. Surface Layer (Social Energy)
- Congrats, likes, short comments
- Keeps the platform active
- Helps distribution
2. Core Layer (Real Value)
- Sharing hard-earned knowledge
- Writing detailed posts or case studies
- Pointing out problems, trade-offs, failures
- Equivalent to “raising issues / PRs” in open source
Only the second layer compounds over time.
If you look at respected engineers or thinkers:
- They may get many “congrats”
-
But what actually builds their reputation is:
- consistent high-quality output
- willingness to say something non-obvious
- evidence of real work behind the scenes
So your intuition is directionally right, but incomplete:
- In open source → contribution is the system
- On LinkedIn → contribution + visibility both matter
If you ignore visibility entirely, your work may stay unseen. If you ignore substance, your visibility becomes shallow and short-lived.
The more practical framing is:
Treat “congrats” as noise that helps distribution, but treat real contributions as the only thing that builds durable value.
And if you’re deciding how to behave:
- Spend most of your time on substance
- Use the platform mechanics just enough so that substance gets seen
That balance is what separates people who look active from people who are actually respected.