The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News • Hacker News Board

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#351

Post by nkurz » Thu, Aug 08, 2019, 4:07 PM UTC

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #299

rhacker wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like 1st day of month are the hiring threads... what about on the 15th we have a very focused political debate - and no other threads are allowed to have it. I definitely agree that tech lately is so intertwined with politics.

What happens if on the 16th Bloomberg announces that all organizers of the protests at Google have left or been fired? What happens if on the 17th, during a big ML conference, a prominent computer vision scientist was able to conclusively prove that x% of current facial datasets are majority white male and that this results in y% increase of false positive rates when identifying nonwhites as criminals? What happens i…

Most likely, in all these cases the story would be posted anyway and then some small minority of users who find it offensive would flag-kill it. If the moderators/vouchers disagree, the story and comments might be resurrected. Which is to say, things would work much as they do now.

The difference would be that there would be at least one day per month when unpopular opinions could be voiced without (potentially) being censored. The most important unpopular stories of the previous month would get some discussion, whereas currently they get none.

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#352

Post by cloakandswagger » Thu, Aug 08, 2019, 4:08 PM UTC

crispyambulance wrote: post #317

rusk wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> both a "sjw cesspool" and a "haven for alt-right" both and neither. Partisan discussions, or even any kind of bitching at all ... are outright discouraged. I often step out of line in this regard and don't always agree, but I'm also confident that folk on "the other side" face the same kind of treatment. Though frustrating at times, I respect that it keeps things clean and helps cut out a lot of nonsense, of which…

I LOVE this paragraph. God-damn nails the problems of HN (and other tech-heavy web communities) like nothing else... > The site’s now characteristic tone of performative erudition— > hyperrational, dispassionate, contrarian, authoritative— > often masks a deeper recklessness. Ill-advised citations proliferate; > thought experiments abound; humane arguments are dismissed as > emotional or irrational. Logic, applied na…

That paragraph is a smug, flowery dismissal of the kind of evidence-based discussion that happens on HN.

It's passive aggressively accusing HN commenters of wrongthink and of abusing unreliable tools like "data" and "logic" to counter "humane arguments" (read: emotional arguments).

It basically dismisses the role of data in debate by suggesting that it is malleable or selective--we've all probably encountered this type of weaselly thinking, one that demands proof for an argument and, when provided, attacks the source as biased or the data as flawed. You can argue for pretty much any position when you embrace a brand of anti-intellectualism which believes that all data is fake/flawed and reality is subjective.

If you strip it down, the author is basically saying "I wish these annoying nerds would stop thinking so much and get onboard my bandwagon."

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#353

Post by rocqua » Thu, Aug 08, 2019, 4:09 PM UTC

beefhash wrote: post #69

rubinelli wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm of the opinion that it is best to err on the side of strictness. Once you make a reasonable exception, you open a precedent, and some people are very good at digging up and pointing out precedent.

> and some people are very good at digging up and pointing out precedent. As one of the people who loves being that guy in another community: They're not only very good at digging up and pointing out precedents, they likely have systematic archives of everything that remotely relates to the decisions they wish to see made.

Out of curiosity, what brings you to be 'that guy' in the other community?

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#354

Post by SolaceQuantum » Thu, Aug 08, 2019, 4:09 PM UTC

nkurz wrote: post #351

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happens if on the 16th Bloomberg announces that all organizers of the protests at Google have left or been fired? What happens if on the 17th, during a big ML conference, a prominent computer vision scientist was able to conclusively prove that x% of current facial datasets are majority white male and that this results in y% increase of false positive rates when identifying nonwhites as criminals? What happens i…

Most likely, in all these cases the story would be posted anyway and then some small minority of users who find it offensive would flag-kill it. If the moderators/vouchers disagree, the story and comments might be resurrected. Which is to say, things would work much as they do now. The difference would be that there would be at least one day per month when unpopular opinions could be voiced without (potentially) bein…

Please note what I responded to was that no other threads may have such debates, so I'm not sure this would be the case.

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#355

Post by FussyZeus » Thu, Aug 08, 2019, 4:10 PM UTC

learc83 wrote: post #328

mruts wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wealthy people actually get less sleep than the poor for obvious reasons: their time is more valuable. They also work more hours and have less “free” time for the same reason.

The study mentioned here indicates otherwise https://www.tuck.com/the-inequality-of-sleep/ "the likelihood of short sleep increased with greater poverty" Poor people are much more likely to work irregular shifts and night shifts, which have a serious impact on sleep.

And more importantly, even if the wealthy get less sleep, that's by their choice, not circumstance. A poor person loses sleep because they have 2 jobs and the shifts don't line up. A rich person loses sleep because they've taken on too much to do of their own volition, any amount of which they could abstain from with little consequence.

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#356

Post by reificator » Thu, Aug 08, 2019, 4:10 PM UTC

wozniacki wrote: post #343

Bartweiss wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's always interesting to see a light-grey thread at the bottom of a page that's full of lucid, not-overly-aggressive political discussion. In one sense it's a shame when thoughtful, evidence-based discussion is discouraged for being off-topic. But I suspect that's ultimately what makes those discussions possible; they're happening between relatively small numbers of discussants, in a space that doesn't draw in peop…

In one sense it's a shame when thoughtful, evidence- based discussion is discouraged for being off-topic. But I suspect that's ultimately what makes those discussions possible; No. Thoughtful, evidence-based discussion should never be discouraged or deemed off-topic - no matter how sensitive the topic. ( People reading this, even 10-15 years on, might find the mores of this age whimsical, at best. ) The only reason o…

> Thoughtful, evidence-based discussion should never be discouraged or deemed off-topic - no matter how sensitive the topic.

Off-topic has nothing to do with the sensitivity of the topic or the current social mores. It has to do with not being on topic.

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#357

Post by Alex3917 » Thu, Aug 08, 2019, 4:10 PM UTC

crispyambulance wrote: post #317

rusk wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> both a "sjw cesspool" and a "haven for alt-right" both and neither. Partisan discussions, or even any kind of bitching at all ... are outright discouraged. I often step out of line in this regard and don't always agree, but I'm also confident that folk on "the other side" face the same kind of treatment. Though frustrating at times, I respect that it keeps things clean and helps cut out a lot of nonsense, of which…

I LOVE this paragraph. God-damn nails the problems of HN (and other tech-heavy web communities) like nothing else... > The site’s now characteristic tone of performative erudition— > hyperrational, dispassionate, contrarian, authoritative— > often masks a deeper recklessness. Ill-advised citations proliferate; > thought experiments abound; humane arguments are dismissed as > emotional or irrational. Logic, applied na…

It's great, except for that I don't think the last sentence really captures the gestalt. The people into libertarianism have mostly left to go hang out elsewhere, and Tim Ferriss has never been particularly well received.

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#358

Post by tomatotomato37 » Thu, Aug 08, 2019, 4:11 PM UTC

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…

Itp's not just political discussion; some of the best discussions in general I've seen were in derailed threads on hobby boards.

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#359

Post by clairity » Thu, Aug 08, 2019, 4:12 PM UTC

rusk wrote: post #178

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…

> both a "sjw cesspool" and a "haven for alt-right" both and neither. Partisan discussions, or even any kind of bitching at all ... are outright discouraged. I often step out of line in this regard and don't always agree, but I'm also confident that folk on "the other side" face the same kind of treatment. Though frustrating at times, I respect that it keeps things clean and helps cut out a lot of nonsense, of which…

yes, i think HN balances political discussions well: political discussion, in the philosophical sense of the application of power, is unavoidable in any discussion (it's inherent to communication itself), while partisan discussion (e.g., tribalistic and ideological stances) should be entirely discouraged. leave the labels at the door and let's dive into the ideas, deeper than the platitude-based debate so prevalent otherwise.

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#360

Post by rocqua » Thu, Aug 08, 2019, 4:13 PM UTC

mieseratte wrote: post #294

arethuza wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you know that downvoting is "reflexive" - certainly any time I've been downvoted it was, on reflection, fairly well justified.

> certainly any time I've been downvoted it was, on reflection, fairly well justified. Typically when I find my statements are downvoted it is because I had a quip that could reasonably be construed as negative, combative, etc. I tend to edit and remove those bits. When I find things to be "reflexively" (probably the wrong word) downvoted, it is in regards to simple questions. Simple example, there was an article reg…

It might be a feature of HN believing that HN is becoming more combative and snarky. Hence, simple questions like "How is it cruel?" are more often read like a quick snarky comment instead of like a simple honest question.

In other words, perhaps the perception of a drop in HN quality makes people more likely to reflexively assume bad faith.