941–950 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
What makes me a "homophobic bigot"? If I believe sleeping with a woman before y'all marry is wrong, am I a premarital-sex-phobic bigot? Maybe standing with signs and saying mean things to people who do so, or lobbying to ban doing so, would qualify, but I'm not doing those things with either belief.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those drivers check my ID at the door.
You didn't have to provide your ID when you enabled alcohol delivery? That's how it works in California, at least.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We’re just trying for something better here, and this is only a place where people want to participate because of the people who make the effort to make it better.
I guess this is the one place I have to actually voice my complaint. The entire thread is full of sneering and snark — dark allusions to fascism; unfounded (by logical necessity) allegations about the true motivations of people involved; and attempts to tie together all sorts of ideological enemies into a single outgroup, roughly labelled "Republicans". It is absolutely waging ideological warfare and it only seems to…
We don't like the kinds of things that are posted in these threads, and we try to minimize how much day-to-day political rage fodder gets front page space. At the same time, we have to recognize that these are issues that people care a lot about, and if people find that HN is a better place to have these discussions than elsewhere, then maybe we're offering something worthwhile by having these discussions here when they're about major developments.
But the guidelines still apply and if people are attacking others and engaging in political/ideological battle, you can help us by flagging comments or emailing us at hn@ycombinator.com to let us know about the worst stuff you see.
We certainly wouldn't want HN to be like this forever (it's no fun to moderate, that's for sure). We'll keep doing what we can to move things in the right direction.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Don, we've discussed this on an old account of mine so at this point I'm pretty convinced you are set in your beliefs and more interested in publicly lambasting mine. But, for the sake of this thread, fine. In the source you linked most of the references in scripture were from the Old Testament. I am a Christian, which means I am part of a new covenant with God. Just like I can wear mixed fabrics, I believe that owni…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Don, we've discussed this on an old account of mine so at this point I'm pretty convinced you are set in your beliefs and more interested in publicly lambasting mine. But, for the sake of this thread, fine. In the source you linked most of the references in scripture were from the Old Testament. I am a Christian, which means I am part of a new covenant with God. Just like I can wear mixed fabrics, I believe that owni…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not the person you were replying to, but the Cass review was quite clearly bunk. Its main thrust is essentially: "there are no double blind studies on the effects of affirming care for minors, so we should stop prescribing it immediately". Aside from the fact that the conclusion does not follow from the premise, how exactly could one do a double blind study on puberty blockers? So the report throws out essentially th…
> So the report throws out essentially the entire body of research for failing to meet an impossible to meet standard. This is disinformation that is easily shown to be false if you read the final report. In fact this lie was so widely disseminated that the authors felt they had to address it in the FAQs on the Review website: https://cass.independent-review.uk/home/publications/final-r... > Did the Review reject stu…
CRITICALLY APPRAISING THE CASS REPORT: METHODOLOGICAL FLAWS AND UNSUPPORTED CLAIMS
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes: the cass review is very badly done and misinterprets the data available.
So you have no counter evidence?
https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-health-and-wellness/horm...
And on the subject of the (methodologically trash) cass report:
https://osf.io/preprints/osf/uhndk_v1
CRITICALLY APPRAISING THE CASS REPORT: METHODOLOGICAL FLAWS AND UNSUPPORTED CLAIMS
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which inevitably can be deanonymized after a simple law change, mandating the required data to be reported.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/privacypass/about/ Perhaps a system like Privacy Pass would be ideal. Where a verifier generates a verified client a number of redeemable signed tokens for a session, but when presented by a client, the site doesn't know who that token was issued to, but they know they authenticated this person and can verify they made the token. Therefore they get access.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess this is the one place I have to actually voice my complaint. The entire thread is full of sneering and snark — dark allusions to fascism; unfounded (by logical necessity) allegations about the true motivations of people involved; and attempts to tie together all sorts of ideological enemies into a single outgroup, roughly labelled "Republicans". It is absolutely waging ideological warfare and it only seems to…
I hear you. The problem is it's just the way the world is at the moment, and HN is part of the world. We don't like the kinds of things that are posted in these threads, and we try to minimize how much day-to-day political rage fodder gets front page space. At the same time, we have to recognize that these are issues that people care a lot about, and if people find that HN is a better place to have these discussions…
Isn’t the work of manual moderation largely no fun to begin with, when the rubber meets the road and you need to formulate a novel response, I mean?
I don’t mean to minimize your role here, as all the mods are awesome, and I can’t speak for others out of respect, but I can be trying and have definitely made more work for you all at times.
But all that said, what do the mods do here? What does moderation of HN look like on a good day? What makes the job fun in the first place? Can we build in more fun for users and mods? (Meta-moderation and its points system on Slashdot were peak internet message board user voting and moderation for me, I’ll admit. But Slashdot isn’t Slashdot anymore either.)
I guess I’m trying to understand what you can do and are doing to move things in the right direction, and what that means for HN, and more importantly, how we all can make HN more fun for all involved, hopefully even mods.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don’t need a source… Yikes dude. > …to back up what I’ve consistently observed with my own eyes People have observed everything UFOs and demons to ivermectin curing their COVID. None of it is real but yet people continue to swear up and down on these things gs. > ...given the speed at which research sometimes move Filling in knowledge gaps with imagination is not a substitute for actual data. Ever. > and particul…
Do you really think it's fair to compare a questionable UFO sighting to what I've learned from talking with and knowing people, seeing how this affects them? I don't think it is. Or talking with their girlfriends and hearing about this issue. If you want good evidence that this is hard to study well, even if you maintain that political concerns are a non-issue, around 11% of men report some agreement with the stateme…
Fair enough. I chose my example poorly. My point still stands: personal anecdotes are a terrible way of understanding most anything.
> It's the same as when the marijuana legalization advocates say "it's basically medicine lol" or deny that addiction is possible
100% feel you here. Even as a user.
> There are a lot of bad things people consume and I support banning very few of those. Pornography is not one. Please don't mistake my position.
I appreciate your clarity here and I apologize for being a bit of jerk. So often it feels like people choose views purely on their own internal personal morality. Not a larger live-and-let-live attitude. Which kinda ties into the cannabis legalization thing above imo. The truth was fudged to make the moral argument easier - because that convinces people.
So, again, apologies for jumping down your throat and I appreciate the links.