Trends in menstrual bleeding changes after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination • Hacker News Board

Re: Trends in menstrual bleeding changes after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination

#311

Post by moistly » Wed, Jul 20, 2022, 11:24 PM UTC

dang wrote: post #308

moistly wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You wouldn’t happen to be anti-vax, would you? Because holy cow, you sure are allowing the anti-vax, fear-promoting front page posts to proliferate these days, which only encourages loons to brigade the site and downvote any comment that counters their bullshit narrative. Your toleration for anti-vax nuttery serves to encourage it. It’s a variation of Popper’s maxim.

We moderate accounts that break HN's rules regardless of what they're arguing for, and regardless of how right they are or feel they are. Being right is no license to break the rules. Quite the contrary—the more right you are, the more responsibility you have. Routinely, when people see moderation happening to accounts they happen to agree with, they overlook and excuse how those accounts were breaking the rules (no…

> It's cognitive bias in both cases.

What I’m saying is maybe, just maybe, it’s your cognitive bias that is allowing month-old accounts to post endless fear-mongering pandemic posts.

Like this guy: https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=MuchoMaas

Re: Trends in menstrual bleeding changes after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination

#312

Post by dudeDDRrulez » Wed, Jul 20, 2022, 11:56 PM UTC

dktokyo wrote: post #306

dudeDDRrulez wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The COVID-19 mRNA vaccines do not contribute to herd immunity because they do not confer immunity. They don’t prevent transmission nor infection, hence herd immunity is not attainable from these vaccines alone.

The vaccine has been well demonstrated to provide significant reduction of both of those, actually greater than any prior vaccine for the original strain of COVID. The key infectious strains we see today are variants that, in no small part due to increasing herd immunity to prior strains, are microevolutionarily driven to evolve around the vaccines. The same way the flu develops strains that bypass vaccine protection…

“Herd immunity is the protection of an individual from infection by virtue of the other members of the population being incapable of transmitting the virus to that individual. Herd immunity can be achieved by immunizing a population with a vaccine that interrupts transmission, such as the live, attenuated polio vaccine, but not with a vaccine that does not interrupt transmission, such as the killed polio vaccine.”

Review of Medical Microbiology and Immunology, 13th Edition. by Warren Levinson. Page 259.

Re: Trends in menstrual bleeding changes after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination

#313

Post by dang » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 6:08 AM UTC

moistly wrote: post #311

dang wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We moderate accounts that break HN's rules regardless of what they're arguing for, and regardless of how right they are or feel they are. Being right is no license to break the rules. Quite the contrary—the more right you are, the more responsibility you have. Routinely, when people see moderation happening to accounts they happen to agree with, they overlook and excuse how those accounts were breaking the rules (no…

> It's cognitive bias in both cases. What I’m saying is maybe, just maybe, it’s your cognitive bias that is allowing month-old accounts to post endless fear-mongering pandemic posts. Like this guy: https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=MuchoMaas

We've banned that user many times. Moderation is necessarily inconsistent because (a) we don't come close to seeing everything that gets posted here, and (b) not everything we do is visible.

It's a huge non sequitur to go from seeing something like that to thinking that the moderators are secretly in cahoots with your enemies.

Re: Trends in menstrual bleeding changes after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination

#314

Post by dang » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 6:11 AM UTC

moistly wrote: post #310

dang wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We moderate accounts that break HN's rules regardless of what they're arguing for, and regardless of how right they are or feel they are. Being right is no license to break the rules. Quite the contrary—the more right you are, the more responsibility you have. Routinely, when people see moderation happening to accounts they happen to agree with, they overlook and excuse how those accounts were breaking the rules (no…

Dude, I ask not because I broke rules, but because there has been a LOT of fear-promoting bullshit being posted, by users who post a LOT of fear-promoting bullshit, and you allow it, and them, to remain active. You normally have a very even hand on the tiller. Your words are always calm and rational. You frequently kill posts that delve into disinformation and nuttery. And yet you allow fear-mongering posts and fear-…

In my opinion, you should realize that your view of this is shaped by your own strong commitment on the topics you care about. Because of that, you're much more likely to notice the points you disagree with, to overinterpret them (as you've done with the link you mentioned in the sibling comment), and to weight them more heavily. It's the charge of your own view that attracts this view of moderation, like a magnetic field attracting iron filings into its own pattern.

Pretty much everyone with strong views feels this way about HN moderation, but the specifics of what they feel (and see) are as different and as disagreeing amongst themselves as their underlying views are. We get this sort of complaint from every angle under the sun, literally every day. When you're forced to look at the problem from every perspective, you realize that the dynamic at work is completely different than what each specific perspective thinks it is. But those perspectives are awfully convincing, because the force driving the perception is so intense.

The very same intensity, of course, is what leads people to break the site guidelines in the first place, while feeling entirely justified in doing so—because, after all, one is so right and other people on the internet are so wrong. This is the dynamic we're trying, to the extent possible, to nudge discussion out of.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Trends in menstrual bleeding changes after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination

#315

Post by moistly » Thu, Jul 21, 2022, 5:06 PM UTC

dang wrote: post #314

moistly wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude, I ask not because I broke rules, but because there has been a LOT of fear-promoting bullshit being posted, by users who post a LOT of fear-promoting bullshit, and you allow it, and them, to remain active. You normally have a very even hand on the tiller. Your words are always calm and rational. You frequently kill posts that delve into disinformation and nuttery. And yet you allow fear-mongering posts and fear-…

In my opinion, you should realize that your view of this is shaped by your own strong commitment on the topics you care about. Because of that, you're much more likely to notice the points you disagree with, to overinterpret them (as you've done with the link you mentioned in the sibling comment), and to weight them more heavily. It's the charge of your own view that attracts this view of moderation, like a magnetic…

How tiresome that you continue to scold me for the mocking message that initiated this thread, instead of addressing your nigh-complete lack of moderation of the fear-mongering fringe that have identified HN as a place where they can wield influence without consequence.

MuchoMaas, who you claim to have banned repeatedly, has made 62 posts in one month, nearly 10% of which you have seen flagged and then deleted, but you claim “Moderation is necessarily inconsistent because … we don't come close to seeing everything that gets posted here.”

But… you have seen it: you’ve been active in squelching a repeat offender that you well recognize as persistently problematic.

Of course, in your view, it is my cognitive bias that is causing me to see this as a problem, and not your cognitive bias that is causing you to turn a blind eye to the problem.

I don’t think I’m over-or even mis-interpreting anything: the proof is shown in your words and your actions: you are not effectively moderating the users who are using your social media platform to promote an agenda of fear and doubt.

Have the last word, Dan, because it’s evident that I’m pissing into the wind here. If anything, I expect I’ve only managed to entrench you deeper into supporting the FUD crew. What a shame.