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

An Update on Hacker News

blog.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 371 posts

Re: An Update on Hacker News

#361

Post by scott_s »

morganvachon wrote: post #221
gohjo wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's wildly inappropriate to lob a blanket accusation of fraud against every single person who has ever complained about your moderation. 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 r…

> Good moderation requires a ton of empathy and kindness. Which is sadly lacking among many, if not most, moderators of online communities across the net. I'm not saying that's the case with dang; in fact, I wouldn't know. But it's a thankless job that is akin to working in a call center without pay. It takes a strong personality to keep one's head above the layer of filth floating atop the waters of discourse.

I do know, and Dan has an enormous amount of empathy and kindness. But it is a hard job, it takes a toll, and I think this thread demonstrates how much he's willing to re-visit what he's said. (Even though I'm quite sympathetic to what Thomas said upthread.)

Re: An Update on Hacker News

#362

Post by morganvachon »

danielweber wrote: post #258
throwit99 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had this happen to me when I critiqued a YC backed company. Had a few thousand in 'meaningless internet karma points'. You pretty soon realise after a few further comments anyway, so I doubt it's actually effective. It's pretty mean spirited though - generally a "douchebag" move. It'd be like having a bad employee, but instead of firing him, or discussing his work, just don't bother paying him any more. After being…

IF someone is a genuine troll, then hell-banning is a great way of dealing with it, because it maximizes the time wasted by the troll and minimizes the time used by the moderator. However, if the person isn't actually out-and-out to mess with your site, it sucks. I've seen lots of communities go down the tubes because the moderators get busy with life, and then Something Happens On The Forum, and moderators passive-a…

Indeed, it's a situation where the needs of the many (HN community as a whole) outweigh the needs of the few (banned non-troll commentators). The danger lies in becoming such an elite, closed group due to blind moderation and banning even the most innocent members over a perceived slight, that the moderators themselves end up the trolls of what is left of the community.

For example, there's a certain GNU/Linux distro that is maintained by a core group of devs who have become overtly hostile to any new users of their project, and actively seek to discourage "newbies" from seeking help and getting any benefit out of the project. One would think the toxic atmosphere would have killed the distro off long ago, yet it's maintaining popularity and even seeing an uptick in a certain niche community. I certainly don't understand how it thrives with such a rotten core; yes, it's overall a very well done distro, but even the best product normally can't survive that kind of cancer.

That's not to say that HN would ever end up like that; indeed, from what I've seen they are doing an excellent job overall with maintaining and moderating this community. I just hope it continues to stay that way or improve, instead of going down a dark path towards chaos.

Re: An Update on Hacker News

#363

Post by lexcorvus »

I'm cautiously optimistic about this, but the reference to "inappropriate comments" gives me pause. I'm reminded of this analysis [1]:

We have such labels [for heresy] today, of course, quite a lot of them, from the all-purpose "inappropriate" to the dreaded "divisive." In any period, it should be easy to figure out what such labels are, simply by looking at what people call ideas they disagree with besides untrue. When a politician says his opponent is mistaken, that's a straightforward criticism, but when he attacks a statement as "divisive" or "racially insensitive" instead of arguing that it's false, we should start paying attention.

Especially when paired with coded language like "historically marginalized users" (I'm pretty sure Sam isn't talking about Republicans here [2]), targeting "inappropriate comments" suggests that Hacker News it at risk of becoming a progressive echo-chamber. (Of course, there are those [3] who fret that HN is insufficiently progressive, but the same people probably think Harvard and the New York Times aren't progressive enough, either.) I can understand flagging uncivil comments, but "inappropriate" comments? I'm not even sure what that means. Please proceed with caution.

[1]: http://paulgraham.com/say.html

[2]: If you don't think tech is hostile to Republicans, you've probably never been a Republican in tech. Indeed, who's more underrepresented in tech: women, or Romney voters? (Note: I didn't vote for Romney, and I am not now nor have I ever been a member of the Republican party.)

[2]: See, e.g., https://twitter.com/shit_hn_says.

Re: An Update on Hacker News

#364

Post by dang »

hueving wrote: post #350
dang wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's probably a lesson to me that the one time I didn't hedge by saying "almost" or something like that, someone objects to my "blanket accusation". Actually, I originally wrote "almost never" (or something similar). But then I realized I couldn't actually remember a case where someone provided a specific link to back up his or her grand claim of why they were banned. So in a fit of impetuousness I lopped off the "al…

Keep in mind that people might not want to link the example to associate their current account with a banned account to avoid getting banned again.

I appreciate your willingness to see both sides and think of a good-faith interpretation here. That's the Principle of Charity which HN can use a lot more of. However, the users in question are typically quite accomplished at making throwaway accounts for specific purposes. Several have done so in this very thread.

There's no way, barring some freak outlier, that we banned anyone for criticizing YC or a YC-funded startup. If someone really did feel that way, nothing would be easier to clear up. The real issue, in the overwhelming majority of cases, is repeatedly flouting the HN guidelines.

Re: An Update on Hacker News

#365

Post by dang »

krapp wrote: post #347
jacquesm wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very much looking forward to that, it will have two good effects, it will take the edge of hellbanning and it will reduce the load on the moderators. Three good effects, and give those that have been hellbanned (if they are aware of it) a reason to try to be extra good in the future. Four good effects, and it will make hellbanning more effective (because occasionally there will be answers to a comment). Five good...…

> it will make hellbanning more effective Arguably, if a banned account is making reasonable comments worth responding to, that account shouldn't remain banned. Maybe after a certain number of comments a ban should be lifted entirely. Unless that's how it's meant to work anyway?

If you mean: after a certain number of comments have been lifted by the community out of [dead] status, the account could also be lifted out of banned status, then I agree—we'd like to try that. Effectively, this would give the community control over banning and unbanning.

We wouldn't call these "dead" or "banned"; we'd probably introduce new statuses like "flagged" or "moderated" or something like that. The current form of banning would be reserved for obvious cases of spam, etc.

Re: An Update on Hacker News

#366

Post by dang »

privong wrote: post #345
dang wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My apologies—I wrote that in haste and I see now that it was unclear. What I meant was that you can't lose comment flagging privileges while story flagging privileges remain intact; the software just doesn't do that. Either all the flag links would disappear, or none would. So there must be another explanation for what sciurus described (as I understood it). Does that make sense?

Thanks, dang. Your response to sciurus makes more sense now. Though, his description was lacking enough in detail that I suppose he could have also lost story flagging descriptions. But I am still confused about the apparent contradiction with what you've stated versus what was stated in the blog post, about losing flagging privs. When flagging privs are lost, are _all_ flagging privs lost? Or is minimaxr correct[0],…

I need to check that. Could you please email hn@ycombinator.com if you don't get a reply here soon? I don't intend to forget, but I have a lot of packets dropping at the minute.

Edit: Ok, I checked it. Story and comment flagging privileges are lost or retained as a set. You can't have, or lose, one without the other. It's not clear why minimaxir thought otherwise, since I'm pretty sure the code has always worked this way.

Re: An Update on Hacker News

#367

Post by 03108109108 »

grandalf wrote: post #16

In my opinion the only real annoyance with HN is when story titles are edited. Maybe it will take an updated policy to fix the core issue, which is that while linkbait headlines are annoying, some original works are titled very badly and the poster may actually add useful information by customizing the title (often by highlighting what is most interesting/relevant about the linked article).

03108109108

Re: An Update on Hacker News

#368

Post by 03108109108 »

grandalf wrote: post #16

In my opinion the only real annoyance with HN is when story titles are edited. Maybe it will take an updated policy to fix the core issue, which is that while linkbait headlines are annoying, some original works are titled very badly and the poster may actually add useful information by customizing the title (often by highlighting what is most interesting/relevant about the linked article).

03108109108

Re: An Update on Hacker News

#369

Post by likeagrownup »

etherael wrote: post #241
gohjo wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your post history has multiple occurrences of you calling people retarded. You're so full of shit it's fucking ridiculous. Just fuck off back into your whole, you professional troll.

> respond rudely to people who have already attacked me I didn't deny that > and even there I try to avoid doing so. I just said that, like for example right now.

Got it.

Thanks for confirming that you're an asshole who is happy to subject thousands of people to valueless bullshit because you require the last word.

If dang had balls, you'd be banned for that shit. But he lacks balls when it comes to idiots like you, Dan.

Re: An Update on Hacker News

#370

Post by etherael »

likeagrownup wrote: post #369
etherael wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> respond rudely to people who have already attacked me I didn't deny that > and even there I try to avoid doing so. I just said that, like for example right now.

Got it. Thanks for confirming that you're an asshole who is happy to subject thousands of people to valueless bullshit because you require the last word. If dang had balls, you'd be banned for that shit. But he lacks balls when it comes to idiots like you, Dan.

Keep stalking. You amuse me.
Post reply on HN