Usually I agree with the moderating, but ... • Hacker News Board

Re: Usually I agree with the moderating, but ...

#11

Post by steveklabnik » Thu, May 20, 2010, 7:24 PM UTC

Jun8 wrote: post #9

tokenadult wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't all users see deaded threads if they just turn on [showdead] in their user profiles?

Thanks for the tip, just turned it on and now I can see the question. There must be a lot of HNers like me who don't know this, though. I cannot understand the point of hiding deadened questions while still keeping the comments?

> I cannot understand the point of hiding deadened questions while still keeping the comments?

It's all about removing the visibility. If the story is hidden, so are the comments, and so there's no reason to [dead] all of the comments too. The only way to see those comments is if you have showdead on anyway...

Re: Usually I agree with the moderating, but ...

#12

Post by [deleted] » Thu, May 20, 2010, 7:29 PM UTC

gaulinmp wrote: post #10

tome wrote: post #2

I flagged it. It can barely be described as a paradox, and the question itself didn't contain any useful analysis. It's a shame if insightful comments there didn't get the attention they deserved, but they weren't there at the time I flagged it.

Barely be described as a paradox? What does this even mean? Is the state of paradox not binary? As was stated it could lead to great discussions, the foremost of which in my mind would pertain to GEB and fans thereof. It was a Socratic approach to initiating discussion, and in your mind this warrants flagging?

[deleted]

Re: Usually I agree with the moderating, but ...

#13

Post by JoeAltmaier » Thu, May 20, 2010, 7:30 PM UTC

gaulinmp wrote: post #10

tome wrote: post #2

I flagged it. It can barely be described as a paradox, and the question itself didn't contain any useful analysis. It's a shame if insightful comments there didn't get the attention they deserved, but they weren't there at the time I flagged it.

Barely be described as a paradox? What does this even mean? Is the state of paradox not binary? As was stated it could lead to great discussions, the foremost of which in my mind would pertain to GEB and fans thereof. It was a Socratic approach to initiating discussion, and in your mind this warrants flagging?

It was a whimsical observation; a welcome break to my day. To censor that post was cynical, anal retentive and a total waste of a mouse click on the part of the censor. Shame on them!

Re: Usually I agree with the moderating, but ...

#14

Post by JoeAltmaier » Thu, May 20, 2010, 7:32 PM UTC

RiderOfGiraffes wrote: post #5

iamwil wrote: post #3

I can't even see the original multiple choice question. What was it?

If you choose an answer at random, what is the probability of being right: A:25%, B:50%, C:0%, D:25%.

And I wondered why my brilliant answer got ignored: "use a weighted 4-sided die that comes up "B" half the time. So B is correct."

Re: Usually I agree with the moderating, but ...

#15

Post by Jun8 » Thu, May 20, 2010, 7:37 PM UTC

steveklabnik wrote: post #11

Jun8 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the tip, just turned it on and now I can see the question. There must be a lot of HNers like me who don't know this, though. I cannot understand the point of hiding deadened questions while still keeping the comments?

> I cannot understand the point of hiding deadened questions while still keeping the comments? It's all about removing the visibility. If the story is hidden, so are the comments, and so there's no reason to [dead] all of the comments too. The only way to see those comments is if you have showdead on anyway...

That is not exactly true. When I browsed to the link given on this post with showdead off, I was still able to see the comments, which is weird.

Re: Usually I agree with the moderating, but ...

#16

Post by steveklabnik » Thu, May 20, 2010, 7:57 PM UTC

Jun8 wrote: post #15

steveklabnik wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I cannot understand the point of hiding deadened questions while still keeping the comments? It's all about removing the visibility. If the story is hidden, so are the comments, and so there's no reason to [dead] all of the comments too. The only way to see those comments is if you have showdead on anyway...

That is not exactly true. When I browsed to the link given on this post with showdead off, I was still able to see the comments, which is weird.

What I meant was, without the direct link, you wouldn't have ever seen the story, not that the page would have 404d.

Re: Usually I agree with the moderating, but ...

#17

Post by nkurz » Thu, May 20, 2010, 7:59 PM UTC

I'm not a moderator, but I flagged it because it's not a direction I want to see HN moving. "Ask HN" type posts are tricky --- I'm worried if we start by allowing posts that are intended solely as conversation starters, we may soon end up with a front page full of popular quotes, dumb jokes, and one-liners. Had it been a link to an external page I wouldn't have been moved to act.

It may also be that I just didn't get it. At a glance, it looked like a semantic game rather than a worthy paradox. Why should one presume that a multiple choice question has one and only one correct answer?

I was probably also influenced by the quality of the discussion. When I started reading, the top voted answer was "It is answerable... with a swift kick to the balls of the person asking it", followed by geek jokes about this answer. This didn't seem like a good start. Perhaps I should have flagged only this response, rather than the whole post.

Re: Usually I agree with the moderating, but ...

#18

Post by jodrellblank » Thu, May 20, 2010, 7:59 PM UTC

RiderOfGiraffes wrote: post #5

iamwil wrote: post #3

I can't even see the original multiple choice question. What was it?

If you choose an answer at random, what is the probability of being right: A:25%, B:50%, C:0%, D:25%.

If I'm stated to be picking an answer at random, in what sense am I choosing?

Re: Usually I agree with the moderating, but ...

#19

Post by metamemetics » Thu, May 20, 2010, 8:02 PM UTC

tome wrote: post #2

I flagged it. It can barely be described as a paradox, and the question itself didn't contain any useful analysis. It's a shame if insightful comments there didn't get the attention they deserved, but they weren't there at the time I flagged it.

It would have made more sense if you started by treating the subject line as a given proposition assumed to be true.

Re: Usually I agree with the moderating, but ...

#20

Post by RiderOfGiraffes » Thu, May 20, 2010, 8:04 PM UTC

jodrellblank wrote: post #18

RiderOfGiraffes wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you choose an answer at random, what is the probability of being right: A:25%, B:50%, C:0%, D:25%.

If I'm stated to be picking an answer at random, in what sense am I choosing?

I can't tell if you're trying to be serious and adding something to the discussion, or if you're just being snarky. I'll assume you're being serious.

Selecting an answer at random, in my dialect of English, can be said to be choosing. In my dialect of English "to choose" does not necessarily imply the exercise of free will and decision.

Thus, "to choose at random" makes sense, and might be regarded as "to select at random" without any implication of a deliberate decision (except the decision to follow the random "choice").

Does that answer your question?