Live data from Hacker News

GitHub Deceased User Policy

docs.github.com

61–70 of 109 posts

Re: GitHub Deceased User Policy

#61
post #2

GitHub/Microsoft is really setting themselves up to be a customer-centric (different to user-centric!) tech platform. If you try doing this process with Google, you are given a canned form and you'll probably (not) hear back from a robot.

I think you are giving them too much credit - Microsoft won’t talk to anyone who isn’t a partner and GitHub tends to just be silent on anything they can’t cut and paste an answer to. It’s more an issue that mumbling on about your algorithm and submitting support tickets while bereaved kin desperately seek access to a loved one’s account is just incredibly bad PR and always makes the front page - and nobody wants the…

Anecdote: I have an Azure account with a monthly spend of around $100-200 (so, a very small customer). I ran into an issue with Active Directory B2C a couple of years back. I reached out - despite not having a support plan - and ended up with a Microsoft Engineer sharing my screen and helping me fix the issue.

Re: GitHub Deceased User Policy

#62
Github suspended my account after 12 years and ignores me in every possible way to try to fix it, even though I know various company that work at the company. Github=Microsoft, Github died the day MSFT bought it.

Re: GitHub Deceased User Policy

#63
post #55
post #54

If one of your friends is a freenode user and comes down with a slight case of death, please contact the freenode staff via chat.freenode.net #freenode and their account will be memorialised. (I had to do one of these a few days ago and it's sadly not the first) A lot of providers will be happy to figure something out, too - the previous-to-this one situation the deceased also had a linode account and once I got thro…

Sorry for your loss, I wish you all the best

Thank you. I get better at the "paperwork" parts every time.

And I know my friends I've done it for before wouldn't be surprised that I keep volunteering to do it, and would, if they were around to do so, grin and say "yep, that's mst" at the fact I'm willing to use my experience on behalf of them to make it easier for others.

This really isn't a selfless offer. It makes -me- feel better, and I know they'd approve. So, yeah, seriously people, if you need a hand with this stuff, come poke me with a stick (and I mean that in general, freenode I know far too well, anywhere else I might not know that well but I'll try to help anyway because it'll be easier for me to think it through than it will for you if you just lost a friend).

Re: GitHub Deceased User Policy

#64
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google has Inactive Account Manager, a dead man's switch for your account: https://support.google.com/accounts/answer/3036546?hl=en

Their activity detection does not inspire confidence. Google is an incredibly bad proxy for user activity. Edit: downvoted but no substantive responses? Guidelines are for thee but not for mee, I guess.

Where in the guidelines does it say you must provide a comment if you're going to downvote? I've just read them twice and don't see it. In fact, the only thing I see relevant to your comment is:

> Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading.

Re: GitHub Deceased User Policy

#65
post #54

If one of your friends is a freenode user and comes down with a slight case of death, please contact the freenode staff via chat.freenode.net #freenode and their account will be memorialised. (I had to do one of these a few days ago and it's sadly not the first) A lot of providers will be happy to figure something out, too - the previous-to-this one situation the deceased also had a linode account and once I got thro…

> slight case of death

What counts as slight? Also, it sounds like something I would hear on an Oversimplified history video.

Re: GitHub Deceased User Policy

#66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their activity detection does not inspire confidence. Google is an incredibly bad proxy for user activity. Edit: downvoted but no substantive responses? Guidelines are for thee but not for mee, I guess.

a) The guidelines don't say anything about needing to give a substantive response instead of downvoting. b) The guidelines do say not to complain about voting. c) Both the creator of HN and its moderators have repeatedly said that downvoting for disagreement is perfectly fine. "Downvoting has always been used to express disagreement." Paul Graham, February 16, 2008. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16131314

off topic, and it makes for boring conversation. but:

> "Downvoting has always been used to express disagreement." Paul Graham, February 16, 2008.

this is something that bothered me for years. I know this is how people behave, that the workflow allows and enables it, and the culture we've built around our tools enforces that. When I watch my own feelings before downvoting it isn't my rational self but my petty lizard-brain which does this. It feels good for 1 second before I feel small and petty. Often it bothers me that I did it and I return to the button 3 minutes later undoing the downvote for a neutral no-vote.

Who is served by the downvote? Is it the downvoter who feels upset another person disagreeing and now able to vent? Or the downvotee who can use the experience to learn what language to avoid? Or is it only the platform provider that benefits? If it's only the platform it seems like a very blunt and rudimentary tool IMHO. Perhaps a downvote is still less inflammatory for discourse than an angry reply and so a compromise? Regardless it's still lizard-brained and impulsive every time I use it and the more I think about it the more I'm puzzled that this is form of behavior modification is all we have after so many years on the Web. The biggest lie we tell ourselves is that sharing these thoughts are actually well thought-through "opinions" when in reality it's just "thinking out loud" or "reactions to other people thinking out loud". It's not like writing a letter, diary or journal. The Tech moves fast but our social collective behavior takes millenia to adjust and cope.

Anyway I wish there was a switch that allowed me to hide the downvote button, and if I wanted to enable it, then it could only be done by a forced delay of X hours into the future when activated. I'd like to eliminate downvoting as a behavior in myself in 2021 - not for others sake but for my own inner peace. And also because none of it matters really.

Re: GitHub Deceased User Policy

#67
post #65
post #54

If one of your friends is a freenode user and comes down with a slight case of death, please contact the freenode staff via chat.freenode.net #freenode and their account will be memorialised. (I had to do one of these a few days ago and it's sadly not the first) A lot of providers will be happy to figure something out, too - the previous-to-this one situation the deceased also had a linode account and once I got thro…

> slight case of death What counts as slight? Also, it sounds like something I would hear on an Oversimplified history video.

Mostly just my dark/gallows humour tbh.

Just like there's not really any such thing as 'slightly pregnant'.

en_UK understatement, because I've cried enough already so I prefer to remain as dry as possible from here on in.

Re: GitHub Deceased User Policy

#68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a) The guidelines don't say anything about needing to give a substantive response instead of downvoting. b) The guidelines do say not to complain about voting. c) Both the creator of HN and its moderators have repeatedly said that downvoting for disagreement is perfectly fine. "Downvoting has always been used to express disagreement." Paul Graham, February 16, 2008. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16131314

off topic, and it makes for boring conversation. but: > "Downvoting has always been used to express disagreement." Paul Graham, February 16, 2008. this is something that bothered me for years. I know this is how people behave, that the workflow allows and enables it, and the culture we've built around our tools enforces that. When I watch my own feelings before downvoting it isn't my rational self but my petty lizard…

Edit: I took a quick look at this at it's even easier than that. You can do it with just stylus/Stylish.

  @-moz-document domain("news.ycombinator.com") {
  [title=downvote] {
      display: none
  }
  }
As a personal experiment, I'm going to leave this enabled for myself and see how long before I find the urge to downvote some comment. :D

Original: You could hide the button with TamperMonkey pretty easily (send an email if you genuinely want to, looked at it, and couldn’t figure it out, and I’ll try to help)

Then, the “only after reflection” I’d implement by forcing myself to use another browser or toggling the element title or the extension. I don’t downvote very often (probably 20:1 up to down vote ratio), but I do know that some of mine are still lizard brain.

Re: GitHub Deceased User Policy

#69
Worth mentioning, this wasn't always the case. Github didn't really have much of a policy until recently, if memory serves.

The author of the Sprout library, Bolero Murakami, passed away a while back and I took it upon myself to ask Github what they do in these circumstances. It was shortly after that IIRC that they introduced the account successor settings functionality and updated their death policy.

This part of the internet's functioning has always fascinated me, even since a kid - the fact that your online presence acts as sort of a living obituary, and what happens to your data after you lose ultimate control over it.

Re: GitHub Deceased User Policy

#70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a) The guidelines don't say anything about needing to give a substantive response instead of downvoting. b) The guidelines do say not to complain about voting. c) Both the creator of HN and its moderators have repeatedly said that downvoting for disagreement is perfectly fine. "Downvoting has always been used to express disagreement." Paul Graham, February 16, 2008. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16131314

off topic, and it makes for boring conversation. but: > "Downvoting has always been used to express disagreement." Paul Graham, February 16, 2008. this is something that bothered me for years. I know this is how people behave, that the workflow allows and enables it, and the culture we've built around our tools enforces that. When I watch my own feelings before downvoting it isn't my rational self but my petty lizard…

> Who is served by the downvote?

I’m served by the downvote in knowing that what I said was downvoted. Usually, I don’t need a substantive conversation from everyone who dislikes my comment. The signal that someone dislikes is useful enough.

It’s like in a conversation, sometimes I’ll see a frown or drawn up eyes. I don’t want, or need, every time I say something stupid to have the other conversants stop me and say “well prepend, in that usage...”

I think there’s a mismatch of conversation goals. The school of thought that downvotes shouldn’t be used seems to value engagement over value and content. My goal is to learn and teach the most through comments. To convince and be convinced. As efficiently as possible.

Looking back at comments that are -n the downvotes are usually enough to understand what I did wrong and how to improve. Not always, but usually. And I would have hated it instead of that score I had n+2 comments engaging with me for how they didn’t like it. Or worse, no comment and no downvote. I think the latter is more likely as while I will downvote things I don’t like, I’ll rarely comment unless I have something substantive to say.

I think one of the main defects in Facebook, Twitter, etc is that there is no downvote, only upvote. So there’s no social norm to signify displeasure so we get into this weird cycle where people only know what works and it’s harder to know what doesn’t work.

I think social medial would be better off if we could distinguish the 1million upvoted content vs the 1million up, 1 million down, net zero content. But social media doesn’t really care about providing great content, they only want content good enough to keep me screaming and clicking.

Post reply on HN