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

Ask HN: We're being censored. Why?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 55 posts

Re: Ask HN: We're being censored. Why?

#41

Post by nathanaldensr »

peterwwillis wrote: post #9

You have to understand that HN is an artificial environment, specifically curated to dictate the behavior and thought processes of its users. It is a safe space for nerds who don't want to think about scary things like politics. If it causes heated "uncivil" conversation, it's off-limits here. Especially if the conversation is about civics.

I reject your condescending characterization of HN readership as "nerds who don't want to think about scary things like politics." I think about "scary" politics all the time, thank you, but I still don't want these discussions on HN.

HN is not Reddit. HN is not Twitter. HN is not Facebook. HN's readership is making it clear through the site's moderation tools that they, to some critical degree, do not want content such as this on HN. There are plenty of other forums for the politically-minded to be activists.

Re: Ask HN: We're being censored. Why?

#42

Post by Sone7 »

dang wrote: post #31

Users flag stories that they don't think fit the site guidelines. That's all that happened here. I get that you disagree. People disagree about this all the time, often strongly. I doubt there's a single story that every user agrees belongs on HN. The only unusual thing in this case is the drama you've created about it. We can debate whether a CIA director nomination belongs on HN, but there's no question that the ab…

>The only unusual thing in this case is the drama you've created about it.

I haven't created any drama at all. Many people feel strongly about this and have said so, are they all "creating drama" as well, or is it possible people really give a fuck that this torturer will have an incredible amount of power?

>there's no question that the above submission and your comments are breaking the site guidelines

The only guideline I have broken is the one about vote totals, which I was unaware of and which has special relevance here. You could have asked me to remove it, there was no need to allow the whole thread to be flagged over a straw-man.

It is telling that you claim there is 'no question' about this, when people are questioning it all over this thread.

>Not all political stories are off topic, but the ones that only stir up outrage, however justifiably, and don't also gratify intellectual curiosity, are particularly important to flag.

What?? So, no matter how important a story is, if enough people pretend to be 'outraged' the story must be flagged? Please tell me you see the many things that are wrong with that line of argument. What a despicable thing to say.

There are many comments that agree this is worthy of discussion, the least you can do is allow the conversation to happen - the very least.

This is a critical discussion to have. As it stands, conversation on this topic has been strongly suppressed, and rather than being concerned about that, you're patronizing me, accusing me of creating drama, and implying I want HN to work according to my political views. Please take this all a little bit more seriously and recognize that it's nothing to do with me; but all of us, globally.

Re: Ask HN: We're being censored. Why?

#43

Post by originalsimba »

dang wrote: post #31

Users flag stories that they don't think fit the site guidelines. That's all that happened here. I get that you disagree. People disagree about this all the time, often strongly. I doubt there's a single story that every user agrees belongs on HN. The only unusual thing in this case is the drama you've created about it. We can debate whether a CIA director nomination belongs on HN, but there's no question that the ab…

There's a problem here which perhaps someone would like to step up and solve. HN is the most popular news aggregation site. A lot of people only read HN for their daily news.

Stories like the one being discussed are important, and need to be heard. There could be a compromise solution where everyone ends up happy.

Re: Ask HN: We're being censored. Why?

#44

Post by dragonwriter »

originalsimba wrote: post #43
dang wrote: post #31

Users flag stories that they don't think fit the site guidelines. That's all that happened here. I get that you disagree. People disagree about this all the time, often strongly. I doubt there's a single story that every user agrees belongs on HN. The only unusual thing in this case is the drama you've created about it. We can debate whether a CIA director nomination belongs on HN, but there's no question that the ab…

There's a problem here which perhaps someone would like to step up and solve. HN is the most popular news aggregation site. A lot of people only read HN for their daily news. Stories like the one being discussed are important, and need to be heard. There could be a compromise solution where everyone ends up happy.

> HN is the most popular news aggregation site.

I'm pretty sure Google News and, even though it's not it's main purpose, Facebook are far more popular news aggregators, and even if the latter isn't intended as a news aggregator, both are deliberately more general focus than HN.

For news discussion platforms, Facebook (again) and Reddit are bigger than HN.

HN is distinguished by it's focus.

Re: Ask HN: We're being censored. Why?

#45

Post by originalsimba »

dragonwriter wrote: post #44
originalsimba wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a problem here which perhaps someone would like to step up and solve. HN is the most popular news aggregation site. A lot of people only read HN for their daily news. Stories like the one being discussed are important, and need to be heard. There could be a compromise solution where everyone ends up happy.

> HN is the most popular news aggregation site. I'm pretty sure Google News and, even though it's not it's main purpose, Facebook are far more popular news aggregators, and even if the latter isn't intended as a news aggregator, both are deliberately more general focus than HN. For news discussion platforms, Facebook (again) and Reddit are bigger than HN. HN is distinguished by it's focus.

I think you are right, I had a weird feeling about my comment while writing it and I felt I was missing something. I don't think I'm wrong however. Perhaps it is that readers of hackernews are more in touch with certain things than the general public. I read HN specifically to avoid the noise and nonsense of the sources you named, for example.

That doesn't mean I only want to read tech news or things of "intellectual curiosity", it just means that the news sources the two organizations you named draw upon are in the business of publishing garbage. The up/down moderation and flagging of a real aggregate site like HN makes a huge difference in quality of content, when it's used properly. Reddit users abuse it to vote their feelings which defeats the benefits.

Re: Ask HN: We're being censored. Why?

#46

Post by dang »

rdtsc wrote: post #14

> My comment on it is permanently compressed (even when the thread is opened in an entirely different browser) and has been stuck on 11 points. You pointed an inconvenient fact about Obama and a lot of people are not going to like that. They could discuss it or flag and run away quickly. Flag and run away is too easy, so that's what ends up happening. One time I criticized the obsession with Russians. A user went and…

Didn't we specifically tell that other user this was a bannable offense on HN? I vaguely remember this.

Re: Ask HN: We're being censored. Why?

#47

Post by dang »

snackpack wrote: post #25
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"No politics" was an experiment that lasted less than a week. It was clearly labeled as an experiment at the time. I don't think that it's current HN policy.

Is the experiment really over when politically-adjacent threads are still getting flagbombed and removed? Just because it's not in the site guidelines doesn't mean it's not being actively enforced.

Yes, the experiment is really over. It lasted 3 days I think.

Some political threads get flagged and others don't. There was a thread about austerity and Nazis a couple days ago.

If you're looking for a blanket rule ("all politics" or "no politics"), we don't have those.

Re: Ask HN: We're being censored. Why?

#48

Post by dragonwriter »

originalsimba wrote: post #45
dragonwriter wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> HN is the most popular news aggregation site. I'm pretty sure Google News and, even though it's not it's main purpose, Facebook are far more popular news aggregators, and even if the latter isn't intended as a news aggregator, both are deliberately more general focus than HN. For news discussion platforms, Facebook (again) and Reddit are bigger than HN. HN is distinguished by it's focus.

I think you are right, I had a weird feeling about my comment while writing it and I felt I was missing something. I don't think I'm wrong however. Perhaps it is that readers of hackernews are more in touch with certain things than the general public. I read HN specifically to avoid the noise and nonsense of the sources you named, for example. That doesn't mean I only want to read tech news or things of "intellectual…

The thing is, the readers HackerNews attracts are a result of its focus; weakening the focus invites HN gaining the character of the sites you don't like (some of which, as you note, have similar community moderation mechanisms bit different results, compared to HN.)

Re: Ask HN: We're being censored. Why?

#49

Post by dragonwriter »

snackpack wrote: post #25
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"No politics" was an experiment that lasted less than a week. It was clearly labeled as an experiment at the time. I don't think that it's current HN policy.

Is the experiment really over when politically-adjacent threads are still getting flagbombed and removed? Just because it's not in the site guidelines doesn't mean it's not being actively enforced.

> Is the experiment really over when politically-adjacent threads are still getting flagbombed and removed?

Yes; that was happening before the experiment, too. Most general political news has been officially OT on HN long before the experiment, and remains so under the general guidelines. The experiment was effectively a ban on that small subset of political content that would otherwise be generally within the guidelines.

Re: Ask HN: We're being censored. Why?

#50

Post by dang »

enraged_camel wrote: post #38
dang wrote: post #31

Users flag stories that they don't think fit the site guidelines. That's all that happened here. I get that you disagree. People disagree about this all the time, often strongly. I doubt there's a single story that every user agrees belongs on HN. The only unusual thing in this case is the drama you've created about it. We can debate whether a CIA director nomination belongs on HN, but there's no question that the ab…

>>Not all political stories are off topic, but the ones that only stir up outrage, however justifiably, and don't also gratify intellectual curiosity, are not a good fit. So does that mean I can flag anything that doesn’t gratify my intellectual curiosity? Because I personally find it very intellectually curious what is currently happening in the United States, but when those stories get buried by a few overzealous p…

It sounds like you might want a different kind of forum than HN. If every political outrage made the front page, that would change HN into a forum about "what is currently happening in the United States". Such a site could be valuable, but wouldn't be HN. HN has a different mandate, which it's our job to stick to.

There's room for lots of kinds of website. I think a forum dedicated to intellectual curiosity has a right to exist, among others; and if HN is to be that, it has to be preserved actively, since the default forces all point the other way. User flags are part of how HN preserves itself. Yes, there are exceptions, but those need to be infrequent and have some unusual quality that raises them out of the category of latest outrage.

The supply of outrages outweighs the capacity of this site to accommodate them. Rather than calling that disgusting and despicable (as happened a lot today), it would be better to find a different kind of site that can accommodate them, or perhaps even to start one.

Post reply on HN