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

Lobsters

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 212 posts

Re: Lobsters

#101

Post by burntsushi »

tptacek wrote: post #90
burntsushi wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One small note I'd add is that the Lobsters software has had at least one very unfortunate bug that led to pushcx claiming that I had "disowned all my comments"[1] when I left Lobsters. I had, in fact, not done so.[2] The bug was later fixed[3], but even today, over 2 years later, my comments remain disowned. They were never recovered. Textually, they're still on the site, but no longer associated with my account, wh…

This is interesting, but I'm having trouble connecting it to the comment I just wrote, and I'm wondering if I'm missing a connection that would be more obvious if I paid more attention to Lobsters.

I'm just saying that you can't necessarily trust that an email was sent to banned users. It's a small point. I honestly don't know what to make of the situation as a whole. It is strange.

Re: Lobsters

#102

Post by tptacek »

burntsushi wrote: post #101
tptacek wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is interesting, but I'm having trouble connecting it to the comment I just wrote, and I'm wondering if I'm missing a connection that would be more obvious if I paid more attention to Lobsters.

I'm just saying that you can't necessarily trust that an email was sent to banned users. It's a small point. I honestly don't know what to make of the situation as a whole. It is strange.

Oh. I perceived the parent commenter to simply be saying they were surprised at why they were banned. But 'pushcx explained what happened in detail, and if that explanation is correct (I have no insight into it, other than generally liking 'pushcx, who is not a friend or anything) it's hard to see how they would be confused about what happened.

But I'm just overexplaining myself now. What happened with you and Lobsters is also very interesting (and also yikes, and sorry that happened; I'd be pretty upset if all my HN comments got disowned).

Re: Lobsters

#103

Post by rebeccaskinner »

Hakashiro wrote: post #32

I had an account here. I still do. Like some other people point out: Invitation-only means trolls are less likely to show up. But the higher end of quality is not significantly better than HN. If anything, it might be worse. My experience with the moderation there is that some people post clear self-promotion articles, but when I attempted to post my things, I get told that this content is not welcome on the site. Wh…

I had a similar experience. I simply deleted my account and left the site. If my contributions weren't welcome then that's the choice of the moderators, but I had no desire to try to participate in a forum where simply linking to relevant non-promotional content that happens to be posted on your own website will get you accused of being a spammer.

Re: Lobsters

#104

Post by corobo »

costco wrote: post #68
corobo wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you personally care? No idea, I don't know you. Why would anyone else care that there's discussion on a discussion forum? Because that's the point of it lol

I enjoy HN as much as the next guy but it's easy to get high comment counts when you count archive.is links (and the ensuing 4 levels nested argument about why they don't work with Cloudflare DNS and who's in the right on that), complaints about CSS/scroll hijacking, and general pedantry. You can find many cases where interesting but pretty specific kind of technical stuff sort of languishes at the bottom of the fron…

I made no comparison to HN, nor would I want to. I try to avoid having an "us vs them" mindset because it makes for boring conversation. I don't dislike lobste.rs in any way, I just prefer a wider variety of opinions to go with my tech news so I only really pop by when I'm reminded it exists.

For the record my preferred variety of opinions does not include spam and the other repetitive guff you mention haha, I'll be the first on the downvote and/or flag train for those comments. Absolute yawn fests the lot of them.

Anyway I mentioned numbers because they didn't seem to have changed, I'm not saying more numbers = better forum. That would be daft. More varied and therefore more interesting (to me)? Sure, aye. Better or worse? Nah.

Re: Lobsters

#105

Post by GaggiX »

tptacek wrote: post #84
GaggiX wrote: post #53

I think the killer feature that HN has compared to any other site I know is Dang.

Lobsters has had a series of thoughtful moderators.

That's not really what people are sharing in this thread, to be honest.

Re: Lobsters

#106

Post by [deleted] »

bb010g wrote: post #74
Rochus wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately many examples; usually it starts with a "-1 spam", e.g. for this post: https://lobste.rs/s/ebztmj/now_we_know_which_cs_publication_... And if you then complain that the post doesn't violate house rules, you get some obviously wrong claims from someone of the inner circle why it does; if you then contradict to these claims or present facts, you usually get flagged for trolling, and eventually your commen…

As a Lobsters user, I think you could have avoided those spam flags with a less click-baity title and opening line of the body. “MIT CSG Memo 137 was the first CS publication to use the term "object-oriented"” would have been a better title, since you posted after the result was discovered. Also, Hillel Wayne already politely explained this to you! https://lobste.rs/s/ebztmj/now_we_know_which_cs_publication_...

[deleted]

Re: Lobsters

#109

Post by Rochus »

bb010g wrote: post #74
Rochus wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately many examples; usually it starts with a "-1 spam", e.g. for this post: https://lobste.rs/s/ebztmj/now_we_know_which_cs_publication_... And if you then complain that the post doesn't violate house rules, you get some obviously wrong claims from someone of the inner circle why it does; if you then contradict to these claims or present facts, you usually get flagged for trolling, and eventually your commen…

As a Lobsters user, I think you could have avoided those spam flags with a less click-baity title and opening line of the body. “MIT CSG Memo 137 was the first CS publication to use the term "object-oriented"” would have been a better title, since you posted after the result was discovered. Also, Hillel Wayne already politely explained this to you! https://lobste.rs/s/ebztmj/now_we_know_which_cs_publication_...

Which is obviously nonsense. But frankly, I have no desire to reopen this pointless debate. They shall be happy with their platform, just without me.

Re: Lobsters

#110

Post by burntsushi »

tptacek wrote: post #102
burntsushi wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just saying that you can't necessarily trust that an email was sent to banned users. It's a small point. I honestly don't know what to make of the situation as a whole. It is strange.

Oh. I perceived the parent commenter to simply be saying they were surprised at why they were banned. But 'pushcx explained what happened in detail, and if that explanation is correct (I have no insight into it, other than generally liking 'pushcx, who is not a friend or anything) it's hard to see how they would be confused about what happened. But I'm just overexplaining myself now. What happened with you and Lobste…

No I like pushcx too. Does a great job running Lobsters.
Post reply on HN