191–200 of 371 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there any way for me to tell if my flags are useful or stupid? I tend to pre-emptively flag stories which I know will draw out the worst bits of HN. That's probably a bad thing, and I wouldn't be surprised if it caused my flags to be ignored.
Same here. I generally flag gender stories, not because I disagree, but because the comments quickly deteriorate.
> To prevent abuse, moderators review flagged stories and comments and revoke flagging privileges from users who flag inappropriately. This seems like one of the cases where HN's moderation is both draconian and completely opaque. I can't flag comments, and I have no idea why. I certainly don't think of myself as an abusive user. Maybe I accidentally clicked the "flag" link once. If that gets flagging privileges remo…
As other users have pointed out, to flag a comment you have to click on 'link' to go to the comment's item page [1]. I don't know why PG designed it this way but have always assumed it was a speed bump to reduce impulsive flagging, since flags are more powerful than downvotes. We never remove flagging privileges because of just one flag. The concept of a mistake is all too familiar over here. 1. https://hn.algolia.co…
This (a) draws attention to the exact thing you are flagging (the individual comment/link, not the thread) and (b) puts the confirm link somewhere else on the screen so you can't double-tap the same hotspot by accident. The advisory text is optional, but as others have pointed out, it's not really clear where the line between flagging and downvoting should be drawn.
Flagging seems like the solution to toxic comments, and should be more encouraged. At the same time, this means it overlaps with downvoting—but only one use of downvoting. Really, the meaning of downvoting on HN is somewhat confused and muddled: is it a "flag lite"? Is it a way of disagreeing? Is it a way to push worse content to the bottom? Is it just the opposite of an upvote? Any one of these would be reasonable,…
The question I'd have about a downvote being opposite of an upvote is what is an upvote supposed to be for? I mean that as an honest question. Is it because it's something I like? Is it because I think it adds value to the conversation (usually why I upvote)? I've never seen guidlines for voting either way. The flag guidelines also seem pretty hazy (spam or offtopic [1]). Of course, that could be totally intentional,…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The question I'd have about a downvote being opposite of an upvote is what is an upvote supposed to be for? I mean that as an honest question. Is it because it's something I like? Is it because I think it adds value to the conversation (usually why I upvote)? I've never seen guidlines for voting either way. The flag guidelines also seem pretty hazy (spam or offtopic [1]). Of course, that could be totally intentional,…
I figure that's up to the voters. Personally I upvote things I disagree with all the time, provided the comment presents a compelling argument worth considering. As for downvotes, it's never due to disagreement for me - only in times I find a comment to be unnecessarily negative, personal, or the opposite of "a compelling argument worth considering".
I don't care if I agree with someone. I just want them to provide more information and add some value to the discussion. If the information is invalid, I just do what I can to provide counter resources.
I also generally try to approach downvotes the way you're saying as well, though that brings us back to downvotes being "mini flags". I don't know that I disagree with that.
Mostly just bringing up that upvotes and downvotes aren't really defined. They represent the general unspoken opinion of the people voting, which I think is fine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same here. I generally flag gender stories, not because I disagree, but because the comments quickly deteriorate.
Perhaps flagging those comments would be better, since they are what you claim to be the problem.
I generally flag articles that are overly political, articles that look too much like advertising and anything behind a paywall. I haven't lost flagging abilities, but I do have some concern that moderators might not agree with me, particularly about paywalls.
I still read HN. There's a good article or two per day. That said, the moderation needs work. (Or, more accurately, to be put out of work.) I've been under "rankban" for at least a year, if not longer. This means that my posts, even if they get a lot of upvotes, fall to or near the bottom. I don't really care, and while I could use sock puppets to get around that, I'm too old for that shit and I don't really care. St…
While it's my impression (from other comments, &c) that your claim is accurate, this alone isn't necessarily proof. I would generally expect a site to perform better for logged-out users, as 1) it gets to skip any tasks that are for logged-in users only, and 2) it should tend to have everything it needs to render that version hot in whatever caches might be involved...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
* Ever notice how people who make claims about why they got banned never provide links to the posts in question? That's because their claims are nearly always false. If users could look at the actual record, their perennial sob story of perfectly reasonable behavior struck down by bullying censors would evaporate. * When that kind of response comes from the site's moderator, I really don't see the level of toxicity i…
You may be right. I'll look at the comment later and see if I should have written it differently. There's no time to reflect just now. I try hard not to let personal irritation leak through in my HN comments, but I do fail at it. The most I can claim is a willingness to correct mistakes.
People have wildly divergent views as to what's appropriate, what's a little rude, and what's over the line. This means that even if you really truly believe that there was NEVER a mistake made during moderation, that some people will truly believe what they said.
Good moderation requires a ton of empathy and kindness.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The question I'd have about a downvote being opposite of an upvote is what is an upvote supposed to be for? I mean that as an honest question. Is it because it's something I like? Is it because I think it adds value to the conversation (usually why I upvote)? I've never seen guidlines for voting either way. The flag guidelines also seem pretty hazy (spam or offtopic [1]). Of course, that could be totally intentional,…
To be trite, one reason for an upvote is to be an opposite of a downvote. Frequently I find myself upvoting greyed-out comments (even if I disagree) simply because they have merit, despite the fact that some folks find them disagreeable.
I try to ask "does it add information to the conversation?" and upvote or downvote based on that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
how do you read 'angersock'? To me the plain reading is "an online persona distinct from one's usual persona; and one which has an extremely angry tone." I agree there is nothing wrong whatsoever with his actual comments.
Your reading is correct...unfortunately, my early posts actually did better than expected, and I seem to have become the mask, so to speak. I agree there is nothing wrong whatsoever with his actual comments. That's the nicest thing anybody's said about me all week. :)