141–150 of 264 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They don't want the HN crowd there because it brings abuse & harassment. If Dang instead would block the domain, everyone would be happy.
If they don't want people visiting their website maybe they shouldn't put it on the internet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People shouldn't post bad comments on HN either, but HN still needs to ban users and handle spam anyways. The point is about what can realistically be done, not each of us lamenting a different "how the world should be".
The analogy isn't being able to ban users and handle spam. It'd be more like adding a feature with the sole purpose of making it easier to post bad comments.
Note: sites can still detect HN users and modify content without the referer. E.g., using the CSS styling for if "news.ycombinator.com" is a visited link. If not visited, content hidden. If visited, content shown. Based on the status the site can also trigger a redirect via JS at that point. My comment was that it seems better to let the site just opt out directly, not about what site operators should or shouldn't be doing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The analogy isn't being able to ban users and handle spam. It'd be more like adding a feature with the sole purpose of making it easier to post bad comments.
A clearer relation to how preventing hairy-ball responses, like JWZ has, is like making it easier to post bad comments would be appreciated, I'm having trouble following the relation. Note: sites can still detect HN users and modify content without the referer. E.g., using the CSS styling for if "news.ycombinator.com" is a visited link. If not visited, content hidden. If visited, content shown. Based on the status th…
Thankfully no it can't, because browser vendors already know about that vulnerability and have fixed it. Visited link styling can only affect color now, and isn't reflected in getComputedStyle, exactly to prevent that kind of thing.
I'm sure there must be some back story here. What are these people's concerns? They seem to believe that HN is a bastion for harassment. Of all the forums I read, this seems the most benign by a large margin.
My opinion: HN has a particular culture and attitude to discussion that can be grating for non-users. One example: HNers tend to approach topics as if they have a solid grasp on the context of a matter, and are often negative, hence dang's plea against 'middlebrow dismissal.' Another example: the common practice of leading rebuttals to a comment with "No. \n" While that's OK here, there are a lot of people who would…
There's also a pretty hard bias in what is considered political and what is not. When I happen to disclose my identity (which is considered very political, apparently), even if it is topical, I roll dice on having that comment be purged to hell no matter the value of the contribution. Depends a bit on the time of day, even.
We got complaints from users about sites punishing HN referrers so I tried to oblige them, the same way we do other user requests. At the moment I feel caught in a double bind because there are complaints no matter what we do. I'm in a workshop today and can only check HN on breaks, so I can't properly read this thread yet. I'll return to it later, probably this evening. Edit: I think I agree with the users arguing t…
Why use noreferrer instead of banning the domain, out of curiosity?
It doesn't work to say "but they asked us to ban their site" because there's no reliable way to get that message to people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That comment is quoting its parent comment in order to object to it. The parent comment was flagged and we banned the account that posted it. I'm not sure what else we should have done there.
> and we banned the account that posted it I'm not sure what else we should have done there. Take a moderator action at the time and not a month later?
I'm sure there must be some back story here. What are these people's concerns? They seem to believe that HN is a bastion for harassment. Of all the forums I read, this seems the most benign by a large margin.
[flagged]
But it's relevant to the point I'm making.
This is a thoughtful, carefully-worded argument that has been repeatedly upvoted and downvoted (the downvotes seem to come in pairs -- admin action?)
The moderation of this comment allows anonymous people, lurking in the shadows, to make decisions about what other people read, with no accountability or consequence.
It is forbidden to talk about the moderation decisions, yet the moderation game mechanic is, in 2023, no longer fit-for-purpose, given the new realities of the political climate. The moderation mechanic is the story, and is no longer able to provide fair, reasonable, accountable crowdsourced moderation. A relic of less polarized times.
Prophecy: Hacker News will either change, or perish. The usual deal, presented to organisms and organizations alike.
Preserving its heirloom-varietal forum interface into the coming decade will be popular (in a decade increasingly stricken with nostalgia,) but also lethal.
Thus, I predict the demise of Hacker News.
The website will of course persist for as long as it remains useful to Y Combinator, but as the natural center-of-gravity for all of tech culture? Die fetten Jahre sind vorbei.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You did the right thing by adding noreferrer to their links. Knowing where people got to your site from without them explicitly telling you is a privilege, and it's one that they chose to abuse.
There's a reason websites that host several communities ban such interactions upon the request of the recipient of the traffic; brigading is bannable on reddit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why use noreferrer instead of banning the domain, out of curiosity?
Banning the domain actually doesn't work because people see that the domain is banned, observe that there's nothing wrong with the domain, and then accuse us of being unfair and hostile to the author/site. In doing that they usually jump to the most uncharitable, horrible reasons they can imagine for why we might have done so. It doesn't work to say "but they asked us to ban their site" because there's no reliable wa…
We got complaints from users about sites punishing HN referrers so I tried to oblige them, the same way we do other user requests. At the moment I feel caught in a double bind because there are complaints no matter what we do. I'm in a workshop today and can only check HN on breaks, so I can't properly read this thread yet. I'll return to it later, probably this evening. Edit: I think I agree with the users arguing t…
It's absolutely super gross to selectively apply noreferer to links only to Asahi Linux or JWZ's blog, because it's obvious you're doing it specifically to spite the people running those sites. If you applied it to every link, that might be different. I mean, the receipts are still out there, people still know what's up. But at least you're not being openly prejudicial.