Live data from Hacker News

Dang is a terrible moderator who engages in ideological censorship

news.ycombinator.com

11–20 of 26 posts

Re: Dang is a terrible moderator who engages in ideological censorship

#11
I rarely agree with his stance in regards to political moderation.

On the other hand I don't envy his position. It is easy to be critical, but harder to put yourself in his shoes and suggest improvements.

Overall I think he wants to moderate for the most sensitive users of a particular persuasion. I view HN as a product of Silicon Valley's culture.

The end result is that I self censor when I disagree with what I perceive as a the prevailing view on HN.

Take it or leave it. Discussing political views online isn't an especially fruitful use of my time.

Occasionally there are a few interesting articles. If I need a diversion I focus on the ones I'd like to read. Commenting is rarely worth it in my view.

Re: Dang is a terrible moderator who engages in ideological censorship

#12
The entire structure of HN does inevitably lead to an echo chamber

Group dynamics always and consistently create situations where "popular" views are much easier to express. This is not caused by moderation and not unique to HN. In fact, good moderation should give some pushback against such which makes it less awful to participate in good faith while disagreeing with the majority view.

My first-hand personal experience is that HN is generally better than most forums about allowing for and supporting disagreement with the popular views on the site, so long as you follow the rules concerning civility and the like.

I find group dynamics fascinating. It's unfortunate that moderation of online forums is one of the best real world "labs" for such an interest. It inevitably gets interpreted as me sucking up to the mods here rather than me simply finding the topic interesting and desiring to participate in the discussion in good faith.

I keep trying to find other outlets, but they tend to fail to satisfy.

Re: Dang is a terrible moderator who engages in ideological censorship

#15

I rarely agree with his stance in regards to political moderation. On the other hand I don't envy his position. It is easy to be critical, but harder to put yourself in his shoes and suggest improvements. Overall I think he wants to moderate for the most sensitive users of a particular persuasion. I view HN as a product of Silicon Valley's culture. The end result is that I self censor when I disagree with what I perc…

What do you find you self-censor the most on? Perhaps not going in-depth, but I'd be curious on what you notice you feel isn't a good fit for the site.

Re: Dang is a terrible moderator who engages in ideological censorship

#16
post #15

I rarely agree with his stance in regards to political moderation. On the other hand I don't envy his position. It is easy to be critical, but harder to put yourself in his shoes and suggest improvements. Overall I think he wants to moderate for the most sensitive users of a particular persuasion. I view HN as a product of Silicon Valley's culture. The end result is that I self censor when I disagree with what I perc…

What do you find you self-censor the most on? Perhaps not going in-depth, but I'd be curious on what you notice you feel isn't a good fit for the site.

Off the top of my head, Climate change, China, Hofstede, the primacy of the state and bicycling oddly enough.

The first one I won't touch anywhere online. China has too many wumaos. There's very little room to question the role of the state without things devolving rapidly.

As it concerns cycling, suggesting that people can get out there as self-starters without the need for designated lanes had me warned for being impolite? Not sure how much gentler I could have said it.

I few comments later someone else was suggesting that I was an outlier as a former bike messenger and that most couriers are run-over so my opinion isn't valid. Somehow this one passed by the moderation team.

I get that the moderators can't be everywhere at once. Not here for Internet points. I want to be polite with everyone. But I view the pedantic wrist slaps as falling on one side and ignoring the other.

Re: Dang is a terrible moderator who engages in ideological censorship

#17
I've been reading top HN posts for a few years now and recently started reading a little more of the comments. My personal impressions are that here we have a good and precise moderation. What makes me think this way is that I mostly remember reading deep, reasonable, authentic and specific comments and discussion, even in long lists of comments - different from some other forums / channels where it might be more common to see hateful, toxic comments. Is it a good moderation or the public here is more polite? Or both, maybe? What I see in this post here is a lot of offensive accusations and supposed constatation, without examples, evidence or even a narrative of facts that led to this rage and indignation... In my perception a clear example of post that is not useful, not following the guideline and doesn't promote any improve. I feel sorry you feel this way about the moderation here, but I suggest you deeply analyse yourself first.

Re: Dang is a terrible moderator who engages in ideological censorship

#18
post #2

Why don't you supply links so readers can make up their own minds? It sucks to get moderated, and often feels like the mods are doing it because they disagree with you. Whatever your ideology is, though, I guarantee you there are users on the other side complaining that yours is the one we secretly agree with and theirs is the one we're censoring.

I think you may be underestimating this issue. It is leading to one of the most heinous and vile things someone can do on an internet forum, shadow banning, akin to putting them in an isolation cell; only worse worse, basically transporting them there without even letting them know they are/were put there and users keep commenting and contributing while being essentially locked away and lost in an authoritarian prison cell where no one can hear them. It's downright sick and depraved and one of the worst practices of the tech sector today for which there is zero justification regardless of what unapproved things were said.

There is a real sickness on the net today where "moderators" have come to think of themselves as the thought police, but even worse, not just thought police of an authoritarian regime, but a kind of self-anointed little dictator that rules over the user rabble at will and upon whim.

If you want to silence people, at least have the spine of any other run of the mill authoritarian and tell users their fundamental human right to speech and expression was taken from them … don't just silently transport them to digital purgatory. Again, it is a vile act that only the most depraved people would excuse, let alone endorse, no matter what unapproved things were thought and said … which are only words/characters on a screen that can be dismissed and ignored.

Ok, I've said my peace. It's a sick and depraved practice and I cannot stand by just not say something when the topic comes up while digital regimes like HN, reddit have, what are essentially digital version of hellish totalitarian regime isolation cells that "mods" disappear people/accounts to.

Re: Dang is a terrible moderator who engages in ideological censorship

#19

Please point out the first substantive parent comment you see at https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

Edit: Nevermind, I misunderstood parent comment completely.

---

What's your point? The search term is ensuring you only find moderation-hat comments, and of course they're not going to be contributing with substance of their own to the topic being discussed.

Re: Dang is a terrible moderator who engages in ideological censorship

#20
post #19

Please point out the first substantive parent comment you see at https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

Edit: Nevermind, I misunderstood parent comment completely. --- What's your point? The search term is ensuring you only find moderation-hat comments, and of course they're not going to be contributing with substance of their own to the topic being discussed.

"substantive parent comment" for that search, i.e. a comment that dang called unsubstantive but that is actually substantive. If such a comment existed, it would lend credence to the accusation that dang was wrongly calling it out for purely ideological reasons.
Post reply on HN