Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Is discussion of wikileaks not allowed?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 35 posts

Re: Ask HN: Is discussion of wikileaks not allowed?

#21

Post by pavlov »

piotrjurkiewicz wrote: post #16
pavlov wrote: post #15

Maybe because you didn't provide any context? Cherry-picking one sentence from an email doesn't seem like a good faith attempt to discuss the issues. (The same applies for Trump quotes! We should give him the benefit of doubt and make a reasonable attempt to understand the proper context of his bizarre but extremely quotable statements... But in his case, it's often difficult or meaningless to determine context becau…

You comment his actions, but haven't even bothered to check the submission he complains about, have you? He provided a link to the full content of email he cited. I thought that this is a preferred approach: provide just facts, without adding own subjective context and interpretation to them.

Actually I did look at the Schmidt email, and I didn't see what the fuss is about. The same advice could have been given by any other number of people.

That's why I wish the poster would have given some context: why is this worthy of being on HN? Just because it's a private email from Eric Schmidt?

Re: Ask HN: Is discussion of wikileaks not allowed?

#22

Post by grzm »

meira wrote: post #11
grzm wrote: post #5

I think there are a lot of HN users who are flagging political/US election-related topics in general, especially those that don't have a strong tech angle. Just for clarification, as I understand it, "flagged" is a result of users marking it flagged. I'm not sure how a submission gets marked dead (for example, if it's moderator-only or can be marked dead if there are enough flags) There's been a lot of discussion on…

By general you mean not Trump? Because I saw a lot of hipster upping jokes about him.

In reference to "HN users who are flagging political/US election-related topics in general"? By topics I mean submissions, not comments. I'm assuming the jokes you're referring to are in comments.

Comment flagging/up voting/down voting behavior is interesting as well, especially as I've seen discussion that voting behavior can indicate agreement (do I agree with the comment?) or substance (do I think the comment adds to the discussion?).

As for bias, I'm not ready to wade into that without more analysis of what's actually going on. It's too politically charged. I'm speculating about what I think is happening. Please don't read this as taking a position on the behavior itself.

Re: Ask HN: Is discussion of wikileaks not allowed?

#23

Post by thisisdallas »

pavlov wrote: post #21
piotrjurkiewicz wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You comment his actions, but haven't even bothered to check the submission he complains about, have you? He provided a link to the full content of email he cited. I thought that this is a preferred approach: provide just facts, without adding own subjective context and interpretation to them.

Actually I did look at the Schmidt email, and I didn't see what the fuss is about. The same advice could have been given by any other number of people. That's why I wish the poster would have given some context: why is this worthy of being on HN? Just because it's a private email from Eric Schmidt?

This is news about a tech giant suggesting a database be created based on voting habits that includes additional metadata about individuals.

The fact that Schmidt obviously has ties to Google brings up the question of whether or not Google resources and user data would be used to help create such a thing.

Honestly, the political aspect is quite minor compared to the the tech aspect.

On another note, my original post included the suggestion that the Clinton campaign hire low wage workers. Implying their political passion would allow them to pay low wages. In my opinion, that manipulation is horrible.

Both of those topics seem like something the hn community would like to discuss. Unfortunately, it seems mods/admin/whoever are letting their political biased rise up above login and quality conversation.

Re: Ask HN: Is discussion of wikileaks not allowed?

#24

Post by meira »

grzm wrote: post #22
meira wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By general you mean not Trump? Because I saw a lot of hipster upping jokes about him.

In reference to "HN users who are flagging political/US election-related topics in general" ? By topics I mean submissions, not comments. I'm assuming the jokes you're referring to are in comments. Comment flagging/up voting/down voting behavior is interesting as well, especially as I've seen discussion that voting behavior can indicate agreement (do I agree with the comment?) or substance (do I think the comment add…

No, I mean all these apps and sites that make jokes about Trump. They are in the front page for months. Only now the joke is starting to get back to people that threw it. Here from distance, I'm laughing off Clinton supporters. The most funny thing is that a lot of these stupid guys are famous in tech, and consider themselves smart.

Re: Ask HN: Is discussion of wikileaks not allowed?

#25

Post by grzm »

meira wrote: post #24
grzm wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In reference to "HN users who are flagging political/US election-related topics in general" ? By topics I mean submissions, not comments. I'm assuming the jokes you're referring to are in comments. Comment flagging/up voting/down voting behavior is interesting as well, especially as I've seen discussion that voting behavior can indicate agreement (do I agree with the comment?) or substance (do I think the comment add…

No, I mean all these apps and sites that make jokes about Trump. They are in the front page for months. Only now the joke is starting to get back to people that threw it. Here from distance, I'm laughing off Clinton supporters. The most funny thing is that a lot of these stupid guys are famous in tech, and consider themselves smart.

Gotcha. Thanks for clarifying.

Re: Ask HN: Is discussion of wikileaks not allowed?

#26

Post by piotrjurkiewicz »

grzm wrote: post #17
piotrjurkiewicz wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You must be a new HN user. Few weeks ago HN front page was full of political/election topics. They weren't flagged, and even some of them were heavily upvoted. But these submissions were mostly anti-Trump. Now, when most submissions are anti-Clinton, they are being flagged and removed. Those which despite that are able to get many upvotes, are being silently hidden from front page. Moderators also add "a moderation d…

"You must be a new HN user. Few weeks ago HN front page was full of political/election topics." Yes, I am a relatively new commenter (24 days). I started following comments at a particularly heated time. And the community aspects of the site are very interesting to me, in traction between users, community policing, the behavior of the moderators, how people choose to trust some sources and distrust others, how people…

> As for "moderation downweight", do you have some links for discussion on this feature?

I pasted a wrong link in parentheses next to the fragment about moderation downweight. Here is a link to a comment where moderator admits it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12715332

Re: Ask HN: Is discussion of wikileaks not allowed?

#27

Post by grzm »

piotrjurkiewicz wrote: post #26
grzm wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"You must be a new HN user. Few weeks ago HN front page was full of political/election topics." Yes, I am a relatively new commenter (24 days). I started following comments at a particularly heated time. And the community aspects of the site are very interesting to me, in traction between users, community policing, the behavior of the moderators, how people choose to trust some sources and distrust others, how people…

> As for "moderation downweight", do you have some links for discussion on this feature? I pasted a wrong link in parentheses next to the fragment about moderation downweight. Here is a link to a comment where moderator admits it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12715332

Thanks for the link! I appreciate it.

Your phrasing "a comment where moderator admits it": "admit" is often used in cases where someone is acknowledging some wrongdoing. Is this the connotation you intended?

Here's what the moderator said:

"Sorry, but pure politics aren't a good fit for HN, so in addition to the user flags already on the post we've added a moderation downweight."

To me that looks like an explanation. It doesn't look like they're trying to hide their decisions (whether or not one agrees with them).

If I'm misreading your intent, please stop now and let me know :) I don't mean or want to put words in your mouth.

If you do think what they did was wrong in some way, I'm interested in hearing why you think so. Some more questions, if you'd take the time to answer. If you're not, that's perfectly fine, too.

- Is it wrong for moderators to enforce stated community guidelines? (e.g., https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

- Do you think the moderators are doing so unevenly? On purpose?

- Should communities have guidelines? If so, what guidelines are fair?

- Is there a difference between topic guidelines and behavior guidelines? For example, I've seen users cautioned by moderators to keep comments substantive and civil here on HN.

I'm trying to inform my own opinion around these topics, and would like to know what others think to get a better understanding of the issues.

Thanks again! At this point I think I've said all I really can on this thread, so, as they say on the radio, I'll take my answer off the air :)

Re: Ask HN: Is discussion of wikileaks not allowed?

#28

Post by throwaway274739 »

Hacker News is, as clearly stated in the FAQ, "for things of interest to hackers". Given how widely discredited WikiLeaks is -- pretty much every neutral observer acknowledges they're now little more than a messenger for Russian intelligence operatives -- I can't see much value in discussing this garbage.

There are plenty of places for on the internet where you can find Donald Trump circle jerks where you can discuss this with the plethora of conspiracy theorists, white nationalists and Trump supporters this stuff tends to attract. Hacker News is not one of them.

Re: Ask HN: Is discussion of wikileaks not allowed?

#29

Post by kapauldo »

meira wrote: post #11
grzm wrote: post #5

I think there are a lot of HN users who are flagging political/US election-related topics in general, especially those that don't have a strong tech angle. Just for clarification, as I understand it, "flagged" is a result of users marking it flagged. I'm not sure how a submission gets marked dead (for example, if it's moderator-only or can be marked dead if there are enough flags) There's been a lot of discussion on…

By general you mean not Trump? Because I saw a lot of hipster upping jokes about him.

Not hipsters, college educated people.
Post reply on HN