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

PG on trolls

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 190 posts

Re: PG on trolls

#21

Post by cawel »

immad wrote: post #18
DarrenStuart wrote: post #11

I think news.yc has a 5th troll behavior and it's down modding a comment because they disagree with it. I have been down modded a number of times not for saying something rude or stupid just something that others don't agree with. I tend to down mod rude and aggressive people on here and I also up mod people who I think have been down modded unfairly. I am not sure if I am alone with my way of thinking.

We shouldn't down mod things we disagree with?

I guess it's a matter of pertinence. Comments supporting a constructive conversation should be uppmodded (which does not mean it's comments you agree with). Or comments you want others to pay attention to (diluting uninteresting ones by extension).

Like in this thread, we can note the irony (and worshiping) of the community, with the top comment (11 points so far) done by anewaccountname, deliberately taking a piss out of PG's essay.

Re: PG on trolls

#22

Post by jcwentz »

dfranke wrote: post #17
anewaccountname wrote: post #15

Who is this guy and what authority does he have to write about these topics? I haven't read the essay, but there's no way anything so short and written in such an informal style could have anything useful to say about such and such topic, when people with degrees in the subject have already written many thick books about it.

Where can I get a degree in trolling?

I'd try Hampshire College, UC Santa Cruz, or the New School.

Re: PG on trolls

#23

Post by curi »

dfranke wrote: post #8
curi wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I agree with you that avoiding those discussions is a reasonable general policy, it's not the case that "no one is really right or wrong" in debates about computer languages, politics, or religion. There is a truth of the matter. Your point that not much is accomplished by such discussions is definitely what usually happens. But it isn't what must happen. There are rational ways of discussing these subjects whi…

it's not the case that "no one is really right or wrong" in debates about computer languages, politics, or religion. There is a truth of the matter. Well, yes and no. There's only a truth to the matter if you can get people to agree on a premise. Two libertarians who adopt the same premises can have a meaningful debate with each other. They'll agree that there can only be one consistent position -- so if they disagre…

There's only a truth to the matter if you can get people to agree on a premise. Two libertarians who adopt the same premises can have a meaningful debate

This is the myth of the framework. See Popper's book by that name:

http://www.amazon.com/Myth-Framework-Defence-Science-Rationa...

Besides the issue of whether productive debate is possible across frameworks, there is also your (possibly accidental) assertion that what premises people believe affects what statements about reality are true (beyond statements about who believes what). That's solipsism.

Re: PG on trolls

#24

Post by prakash »

"Hackers can be abrupt even in person. Put them on an anonymous forum, and the problem gets worse."

I am sure everyone on this forum is on some kind of social network. If we can get every user's handle to link to their flavor-du-jour social network's public profile, verify via email -- that should at least cut down on some of the noise.

PG: What do you think?

Re: PG on trolls

#25

Post by aston »

cawel wrote: post #21
immad wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We shouldn't down mod things we disagree with?

I guess it's a matter of pertinence. Comments supporting a constructive conversation should be uppmodded (which does not mean it's comments you agree with). Or comments you want others to pay attention to (diluting uninteresting ones by extension). Like in this thread, we can note the irony (and worshiping) of the community, with the top comment (11 points so far) done by anewaccountname, deliberately taking a piss o…

Actually, there's no way a comment like anewaccountname's would get upmodded to that extent were it not a verbatim reference to pg's previous article.

The fact that people here upmod/downmod based on whether they agree rather than whether it's insightful really bothers me. I think it's the wrong incentive structure.

Re: PG on trolls

#26

Post by curi »

immad wrote: post #18
DarrenStuart wrote: post #11

I think news.yc has a 5th troll behavior and it's down modding a comment because they disagree with it. I have been down modded a number of times not for saying something rude or stupid just something that others don't agree with. I tend to down mod rude and aggressive people on here and I also up mod people who I think have been down modded unfairly. I am not sure if I am alone with my way of thinking.

We shouldn't down mod things we disagree with?

You should refute mistaken ideas with better ideas.

If you want to downmod, it's no big deal. But there seems to be some proportion of the audience that feels vindicated in their views just because the opposite view was downmodded. Downmodding does not make opposing positions less legitimate.

These people seem to be different than the ones who write replies. I've had multiple lengthy threads where I hardly get any mods either way while discussing, and then when I wake up the next day I have -20 karma, but no new replies.

Re: PG on trolls

#27

Post by pg »

DarrenStuart wrote: post #11

I think news.yc has a 5th troll behavior and it's down modding a comment because they disagree with it. I have been down modded a number of times not for saying something rude or stupid just something that others don't agree with. I tend to down mod rude and aggressive people on here and I also up mod people who I think have been down modded unfairly. I am not sure if I am alone with my way of thinking.

I think it's ok to use the up and down arrows to express agreement. Obviously the uparrows aren't only for applauding politeness, so it seems reasonable that the downarrows aren't only for booing rudeness.

It only becomes abuse when people resort to karma bombing: downvoting a lot of comments by one user without reading them in order to subtract maximum karma. Fortunately we now have several levels of software to protect against that.

Re: PG on trolls

#28

Post by hollerith »

I wish comments remained deletable longer. My last comment is 3 hr old (and has no replies) and it has already become undeletable whereas when I made an insensitive comment, it continued to be downmodded for about 24 hr.

By "become undeletable", I mean there is no "edit" or "delete" link on the comment.

Re: PG on trolls

#29

Post by jey »

immad wrote: post #18
DarrenStuart wrote: post #11

I think news.yc has a 5th troll behavior and it's down modding a comment because they disagree with it. I have been down modded a number of times not for saying something rude or stupid just something that others don't agree with. I tend to down mod rude and aggressive people on here and I also up mod people who I think have been down modded unfairly. I am not sure if I am alone with my way of thinking.

We shouldn't down mod things we disagree with?

I think karma should be used as an indicator of the quality of the post, not as a reward for groupthink.

Re: PG on trolls

#30

Post by dfranke »

boredguy8 wrote: post #10
dfranke wrote: post #3

Like graffiti, trolling can be impressive when it's done especially well. My favorite troll of all time is the guy from comp.compression last August: http://groups.google.com/group/comp.compression/browse_threa... followed by the famous "Is Your Son a Computer Hacker?" troll from adequacy.org: http://adequacy.org/public/stories/2001.12.2.42056.2147.html

The "Commie Day Care" Adequacy troll was far superior, imho. And it was all much better when it was at k5.

I wasn't impressed by that one. The Hacker troll strikes a nerve because it's frightening. It's all too easy to imagine somebody really being that stupid, and too easy to imagine them becoming influential. The Daycare troll reads like just another ineffectual wingnut.
Post reply on HN