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

The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 812 posts

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#281

Post by repolfx »

resters wrote: post #211
IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #68

This article does seem to get at the essence of HN, appreciative of dang and sctb's humanity while not ignoring the problems. Personally, I would actually consider it an excellent demonstration of the fallibility of one of HN's favourite tropes, Gell-Mann amnesia. If there's one critique that I believe is paramount it's that HN has, due to its readership, an ethical obligation that goes beyond making discussions all…

> But as this article shows, abdicating the responsibility by keeping the topics sterile is similarly suspect, in the sense of fiddling while Rome burns. I believe a willingness to confront the ugly sides of technology with some courage of conviction would eventually be recognised, even if it may occasionally involve a bit of a mess. Absolutely true. The failure of mods (and even pg?) to recognize this is the single…

A mature HN reader skilled in technology, is least likely to undergo an emotional/identity-driven flight of fancy about political issues pertaining to technology

Heh, except for anything programming language related, what the best web framework to use is, whether end-to-end encryption actually works or is just security theatre, etc.

There are lots of technical topics that people attach their identity to and would look indistinguishable from politics to outsiders. And it's the same in any industry. Look at some of the debates in the educational world.

I think pg's "keep your identity small" essay is one of the most insightful and influential (on me) essays I've ever read, and believe it or not (probably some who review my comments history won't) but I try to practice it in daily life. But it argued to choose what you care about carefully, rather than incorporate nothing into your identity at all. It also didn't argue that people can't debate those issues rationally, if I recall correctly, just that it's harder to do so.

the HN mods ban on politics and punishment of those who try to discuss political topics are in fact making a very strong statement of their political preference

Come now. I'm one of those naughty troublemakers who has sometimes felt that the mods here enforce a particular line of thinking (e.g. Damore is awful and so controversial he can't be talked about, wtf) but you can't possibly claim HN bans politics when maybe 20-30% of the stories discussed here are political in nature.

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#282

Post by romaaeterna »

epc wrote: post #265
romaaeterna wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US, that would be title II of the 1964 civil rights act, taking the broad view of it that has developed in case law over the years. I would also support new FCC net neutrality style regulations or even new acts of Congress that strengthened this.

Any changes to include internet services under the Civil Rights act would likely run into a First Amendment challenge fairly quickly, and likely lose. Net neutrality was probably constitutional as long as it applied to physical carriers using public land (for wires) or regulated spectrum. A more likely path would be through Section 508 (the accessibility act). Even that is unlikely with the current partisan makeup of…

I agree that there would be a better chance for this line of reasoning if Manhattan Community Access had gone the other way in the latest SCOTUS term. But it was 5-4, and the decision does leave open some lines of attack.

In particular, Congressional action around this might probably be able to pass judicial review if it were to define broad due process rights around speech censorship for explicitly defined "public forums." The only thing that SCOTUS loves more than the 1st amendment is the 14th.

No way to know until we fight it out.

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#283

Post by billfruit »

Strange that the article seems to hinge mostly on moderation, rather than any of the other things that make HN a great resource.

To me the great difference of HN over anything else has been the expectation on commentors to write something thoughtfull and well argued, and it's discouragement of frivolous commentary.

The mainstream media seems hungup on the concept of moderation when discussing online communities, and I think the moderation framework is only a minor part of what make these communities work.

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#284

Post by dredmorbius »

malux85 wrote: post #23
amrrs wrote: post #2

> On any given day, its top links might include a Medium post about technical hiring Isn't it quite ironic to see the article suggesting that HN top link might include Medium post. I've usually read not-so-positive feedback about Medium posts. Isn't it the case?

Why not judge the post by the insightfulness of the content, rather than the domain from which it originates?

Batched signals matter.

A publication's "editorial voice", ranging from grammar and typography, to selection and discussion philosophy, are significant. There's a reason we see things as "New York Times" or "Fox News" or "Mad Magazine" or "Cosmo" or "The Economist" or "Soldier of Fortune" in voice or tone.

This is harder to pin down with blogs and social media, though distinctions can emerge, whether through self-selection, path-dependency, gross scale, algorithms, or some combination of the set.

Prejudice can be misused, but its advantage (to the judger) is that it makes judgement cheaper by reducing the set of what needs to be considered, at least for an initial judgement.

That's characteristic of any domain in which there's an information overload, or in which distinctions are subtle and difficult to identify initially. And argument, by the way, for dealing with copious information less by enhanced processing and more by expedited (and cheap!) discarding heuristics.

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#285

Post by Gh0stRAT »

Bartweiss wrote: post #264
dunkelheit wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Compared to e.g. twitter it may feel this way but there is definitely some discussion going on despite the efforts to keep it to the minimum. And even without directly engaging with "the other side" it is nice to know that they are still here and can provide their perspective on the other matters.

I have a sneaking suspicion that this is how the majority of productive political discussions happen - around the edges of other things. People who show up for political debate generally do so with knives drawn; you hear from the loudest people with the most solidified views, and the stuff that rises to the top is playing to the crowd instead of engaging in extended discussions. But in a rec sports team, a movie club…

>So those places seem to breed conversations where people take the time to hear one another and avoid breaking down into pure tribalism.

Another way of looking at it is that in that context, they are interacting as fellow members of their "rec team tribe" rather than as members of competing political tribes. (which they may also be a part of)

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#286

Post by Bartweiss »

afarrell wrote: post #231
FussyZeus wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is actually my sole complaint with HN. I love the community and I understand where the moderators are coming from, but I feel that it's important to point out that the position of "keep politics out of $X" is the purest expression of privilege, and in general is an attitude that embraces the status quo, no matter how horrifying it might be for the unprivileged. I'm not saying HN should allow ALL political discus…

Something can be both an expression of privilege and a very good idea. Example: The advice to get at least 8 hours of sleep at a regular time each night. This reflects: - the economic privilege of not needing to do irregular shift work - not having a chronic disease which interrupts sleep - not being a parent - having a regular place to sleep at all. However, it is still a good idea for one’s physical and mental heal…

Someone pointed out to me that "this is privilege" conflates two very different ideas. It can mean "this is an unfair advantage which should be taken away", but it can also mean "this is a benefit denied to some people, and it should be shared with everyone".

To take some old settled examples: sovereign immunity was a privilege to be taken away because everyone should be accountable under the law, but voting rights were a privilege to be extended because self-determination is good regardless of race or gender. Sometimes it's obvious what people mean, but sometimes it's very useful to be explicit about what's meant. I think "keep politics out of $X" extends across both categories.

To the extent that a space affects policy on some issue, banning 'politics' effectively empowers the people who benefit from the current state of affairs. As you say, it could still have a payoff worth the cost if some concrete good is being achieved, but I think it is a cost; in an ideal world people would be free to discuss both the current state of affairs and changes they'd like to see. But when spaces are genuinely divorced from any position on an issue, it seems like a privilege to share, to give more people the freedom and resources to at least temporarily step away from problems. Issues are harder to escape or forget for the people who are directly affected, so there is a privilege there, but I don't think the people harassing "rainy day moodboard" Tumblrs to post about Yemen are actually improving anything.

I'm not sure what the perfect balance is, but I appreciate that HN rules try to uphold that distinction. There's significantly more leeway to debate politics when tech engages politics (e.g. government contracts, codes of conduct, privacy), than there is to inject non-tech political discussion simply on the grounds that it's an important topic.

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#287

Post by billfruit »

candu wrote: post #246
azangru wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> HN's prevailing attitude (e.g. cloudflare-shouldnt-ban- ). Funny, I thought HN's prevailing attitude in the case of the recent ban of 8chan was, hell yeah, good riddance to those reprehensible twats. (Which, personally, annoyed me, because I believe that even the deplored should have a space for communication.)

I've seen both opinions, and many more nuanced variants thereof, argued in a well-reasoned, persuasive manner here on HN. Adding my voice to the "good riddance" side of the aisle: thanks to what freedom of speech, association, etc. actually mean in the legal / constitutional context, said twats are guaranteed a space for communication - the real world! They can stand on a corner or picket their local City Hall and sp…

Private entities can put restrictions on their private space, but doing so implies that they no longer provide the same freedom of speech guaranteed to citizens on public spaces, so they are indeed restricting the freedom of speech.

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#288

Post by radcon »

DoofusOfDeath wrote: post #263
radcon wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> HN may be an echo chamber but it is a pretty big one with a lot of voices in it. The echo chamber effect on HN is far worse than any comparable site, it's just not as obvious because there's zero transparency. At least there are tons of 3rd party sites that allow us to see censorship in real time on Reddit. No such thing exists for HN. I have no sympathy for the moderators here. I believe they moderate very arbitra…

I wonder if you're conflating that actions of the moderators with downvoting done by readers?

Do you know what an echo chamber is? Both of those actions lead to the same result.

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#289

Post by mrfredward »

FussyZeus wrote: post #201
dunkelheit wrote: post #147

I guess it is a perfect opportunity to thank dang and sctb for their unobtrusive and friendly moderation efforts. The article itself was a bit disappointing because it focused on political issues. In my opinion the strength of HN in this regard is that it is both a "sjw cesspool" and a "haven for alt-right", as evidenced by the fact that a comment on a controversial topic can easily float near zero points while rakin…

This is actually my sole complaint with HN. I love the community and I understand where the moderators are coming from, but I feel that it's important to point out that the position of "keep politics out of $X" is the purest expression of privilege, and in general is an attitude that embraces the status quo, no matter how horrifying it might be for the unprivileged. I'm not saying HN should allow ALL political discus…

>...the position of "keep politics out of $X" is the purest expression of privilege, and in general is an attitude that embraces the status quo, no matter how horrifying it might be for the unprivileged.

Is there evidence that arguing politics over the internet is causing a net improvement in the world? I'm inclined to think political discussions on social media are causing political dysfunction, not fixing it.

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#290

Post by coldtea »

hos234 wrote: post #163

Discussion in todays world is highly over rated. There are people who build hospitals and there are people who stand around talking about who should build hospitals. The former group in any population in any country is very small. The latter group is very large and thanks to the current architecture of the internet have gotten so over amplified that they think they actually matter. Their resumes don't have any actual…

>There are people who build hospitals and there are people who stand around talking about who should build hospitals.

And the latter are even more important, especially if we don't use a contrived example of the hospital and naively assume "more is better", but extend it to other things people can build where building them is controversial and/or more is not necessarily better. (And even for hospitals, there's the question of how to build them, where to build them, and how to run them).

The people that just "charge ahead" and build are marginally useless. Given the funds, one can hire workers in almost any part of the world to build a hospital to spec. That's the easy part.

Getting the funds, knowing why, how, when, for whom, etc you want to build X, whether X is good, how close it should be to other Xes, whether we really need more Xes, and what's the opportunity cost of building an X, all those are the difficult and important questions.

And those are clarified in discussion.

Post reply on HN