Live data from Hacker News

The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

newyorker.com

211–220 of 812 posts

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#211

This article does seem to get at the essence of HN, appreciative of dang and sctb's humanity while not ignoring the problems. Personally, I would actually consider it an excellent demonstration of the fallibility of one of HN's favourite tropes, Gell-Mann amnesia. If there's one critique that I believe is paramount it's that HN has, due to its readership, an ethical obligation that goes beyond making discussions all…

> But as this article shows, abdicating the responsibility by keeping the topics sterile is similarly suspect, in the sense of fiddling while Rome burns. I believe a willingness to confront the ugly sides of technology with some courage of conviction would eventually be recognised, even if it may occasionally involve a bit of a mess.

Absolutely true. The failure of mods (and even pg?) to recognize this is the single disheartening and cynical thing about HN.

PG gets it half right in his advice to "keep your identity small" when he observes that people cannot argue rationally about something that touches on their identity.

But the other half (which PG and the mods get spectacularly wrong) is that what we think of as "political" beliefs, characterized by groupthink and lack of scrutiny/falsifiability, are typically held about every topic other than an individual's area of expertise.

A mature HN reader skilled in technology, is least likely to undergo an emotional/identity-driven flight of fancy about political issues pertaining to technology. An immature HN reader will either be naively apolitical ("Oh, I just build AI tech, it isn't my concern that it's being used to round up refugees for execution") or will turn off the technical insight in favor of loyalty to some political group (repeating talking points, etc.)

Of any community I've been a part of, HN offers the best hope for grounded, rational discussion of important political topics surrounding technology.

Just as someone who stands by and does not try to stop a lynching is guilty of doing nothing, the HN mods ban on politics and punishment of those who try to discuss political topics are in fact making a very strong statement of their political preference, which is that controversial or troubling aspects/implications of technology or tech firms simply be ignored.

With the advent of Palantir (which has had lots of stage time at Startup School), defense technology became cool. Google under Schmidt became a major lobbying force and defense contractor. Facebook is not far behind, etc. HN mods are constantly surrounded by stories of "successful" firms in the defense contractor space, and just as it is viewed as cynical to be dismissive of the worth of "another startup doing social picture sharing", it is similarly viewed as cynical to question the good citizenship and motives of a firm in the defense/surveillance space.

HN (and HN mods) are a product of the surrounding culture. As a share of GDP, surveillance and defense spending has never been higher during peacetime. In other words, it's a bull market and HN is ultimately a beneficiary of the growth of surveillance and defense tech. Hence its interests are overwhelmingly right wing when it comes to suppressing criticism and threats of that tech.

There are other politically relevant areas for discussion besides the ones I've focused on in this comment. I chose them simply because I think they are top of mind for a lot of people even though the difficult philosophical and political issues relating to them are under active suppression by HN mods.

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#212

I guess it is a perfect opportunity to thank dang and sctb for their unobtrusive and friendly moderation efforts. The article itself was a bit disappointing because it focused on political issues. In my opinion the strength of HN in this regard is that it is both a "sjw cesspool" and a "haven for alt-right", as evidenced by the fact that a comment on a controversial topic can easily float near zero points while rakin…

you may have missed this thought-provoking passage on the intractability of avoiding the political:

> Down the page, another user expressed disdain for the experiment. “The idea that we can carve out a space that exists outside of politics and ideology is delusional,” the user wrote. “Squelching political discussion won’t cause us all to transcend ideology, it’ll just make it impossible to discuss or critique a dominant ideology whenever one shows up in someone’s unstated assumptions.”

> “Of course it’s delusional,” Gackle replied. “And still we have to moderate this site.” Three days later, he announced that Political Detox Week would be coming to an end. They’d learned, among other things, that “it’s impossible to define ‘politics’ with any consensus because that question is itself highly political.”

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#214
post #178

I guess it is a perfect opportunity to thank dang and sctb for their unobtrusive and friendly moderation efforts. The article itself was a bit disappointing because it focused on political issues. In my opinion the strength of HN in this regard is that it is both a "sjw cesspool" and a "haven for alt-right", as evidenced by the fact that a comment on a controversial topic can easily float near zero points while rakin…

> both a "sjw cesspool" and a "haven for alt-right" both and neither. Partisan discussions, or even any kind of bitching at all ... are outright discouraged. I often step out of line in this regard and don't always agree, but I'm also confident that folk on "the other side" face the same kind of treatment. Though frustrating at times, I respect that it keeps things clean and helps cut out a lot of nonsense, of which…

Compared to e.g. twitter it may feel this way but there is definitely some discussion going on despite the efforts to keep it to the minimum. And even without directly engaging with "the other side" it is nice to know that they are still here and can provide their perspective on the other matters.

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#215
post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Studies show otherwise, and I think that the gut reaction of those who read that discussion also shows that at least some developers felt that way, if not in general, then at least in that particular case. Also, that women's participation in software has drastically decreased since the eighties to the point they're now a small miniority is just a fact, and so focusing on them is natural, if not justified. Various cau…

> Studies show otherwise That’s a bold claim. > the gut reaction of those who read that discussion also shows that at least some developers felt that way, if not in general, then at least in that particular case. I can’t follow you here.

> That’s a bold claim.

No, I think this is the consensus scholarly view.

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#216
Are the moderators interested in automating their jobs at all? I really don't understand why the site continues to have no means to help people communicate better, other than a couple dudes that manually respond to people over and over all day. From a technologist perspective it seems archaic.

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#217
post #185

Hacker News is a well-moderated community, but it's illustrative to see where Hacker News fails at moderation. While Hacker News is great at protecting the community from disruptive individuals, it tends to fall down when protecting unpopular individuals against the community turned mob. I support Hacker News moderating itself however it chooses. However, if we are looking at it as a moderation model for large, open,…

> While Hacker News is great at protecting the community from disruptive individuals, it tends to fall down when protecting unpopular individuals against the community turned mob. Isn't every community -barring a few wild west's- like that? One Usenet, someone with an unpopular opinion would end up in people's kill file. On IRC, someone with an unpopular opinion would end up on people's ignore or would get kicked off…

I don't mind this sort of moderation on community sites like Hacker News.

Still, as the error keeps coming up, I will repeat myself (I apologize to people trying to read the whole thread, but this is the main point): For the big platforms (Youtube, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc.) and backbone providers (ISPs, Cloudfront), we need the right to appeal, public auditing, bright line rules, and due process rights.

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#218
post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Studies show otherwise That’s a bold claim. > the gut reaction of those who read that discussion also shows that at least some developers felt that way, if not in general, then at least in that particular case. I can’t follow you here.

> That’s a bold claim. No, I think this is the consensus scholarly view.

Wait: read_if_gay_'s claim was:

> ...because if a man’s achievement is highlighted, the fact that a man did it isn’t highlighted, which isn’t exactly the case for women (apparently a woman in the team suffices for an achievement to be credited to a woman), making these two kinds of articles about fundamentally different things: “X was achieved” vs. “A woman achieved X”.

You dispute that claim, and say the consensus scholarly view is otherwise?

Re: The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News

#219
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because, well, it was true [...] Every person I showed this to was disgusted, as was I What you’re saying here is: because the opinion of me and my friends is objectively correct and yours is not ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Whoever is "right", it wasn't just the media, but also lots of developers, who felt it was a shameful display of misogyny. So it is certainly wrong to claim that the media spun this story a certain way out of the blue. Also, if I didn't think my opinion was correct it wouldn't be my opinion.

The media spun the story in the first place (the reductive 'a woman who took a photo of black hole') because stories of women achieving things generates clicks.

The media spun the story in the second place (the incredibly simplistic 'developers hate women') because the media dislikes people arguing with it and because sexism generates clicks.

Post reply on HN