zlacker

[return to "Tell HN: t.co is adding a five-second delay to some domains"]
1. mutant+l1[view] [source] 2023-08-15 04:21:56
>>xslowz+(OP)
I think that HN itself also shadow flags submissions from a list of domains it doesn't like.

Try submitting a URL from the following domains, and it will be automatically flagged (but you can't see it's flagged unless you log out):

  - archive.is
  - watcher.guru
  - stacker.news
  - zerohedge.com
  - freebeacon.com
  - thefederalist.com
  - breitbart.com
◧◩
2. dang+p1[view] [source] 2023-08-15 04:22:20
>>mutant+l1
Well, yes, many sites are banned on HN. Others are penalized (see e.g. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...). None of this is secret, though we don't publish the lists themselves.

Edit: about 67k sites are banned on HN. Here's a random selection of 10 of them:

  vodlockertv.com
  biggboss.org
  infoocode.com
  newyorkpersonalinjuryattorneyblog.com
  moringajuice.wordpress.com
  surrogacymumbai.com
  maximizedlivingdrlabrecque.com
  radio.com
  gossipcare.com
  tecteem.com
◧◩◪
3. mutant+s1[view] [source] 2023-08-15 04:22:51
>>dang+p1
And you don't see that as censorship?
◧◩◪◨
4. aaomid+C1[view] [source] 2023-08-15 04:24:05
>>mutant+s1
This forum never said they’re a free speech haven.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. dang+Vc2[view] [source] 2023-08-15 19:55:16
>>aaomid+C1
That's true, but it's a bit of an interesting question because "free speech" has different meanings. The thing to understand about HN is that we're trying to optimize for one thing: intellectual curiosity (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...). Given that, we're not "free speech" in the sense of "post anything about anything" - we have to moderate spam, flamewar, lame comments like "ok boomer", etc., because those detract from curious discussion.

On the other hand, no single political or ideological position has a monopoly on intellectual curiosity either—so by the same principle, HN can't be moderated for political or ideological position.

It's tricky because working this way conflicts with how everyone's mind works. When people see a politically charged post X that they don't like, or when they see a politically charged post Y that they do like, but which we've moderated, it's basically irresistible to jump to the conclusion "the mods are biased". This is because what we see in the first place is conditioned by our preferences - we're more likely to notice and to put weight on things we dislike (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...). People with opposite preferences notice opposite data points and therefore "see" opposite biases. It's the same mechanism either way.

In reality, we're just trying to solve an optimization problem: how can you operate a public internet forum to maximize intellectual curiosity? That's basically it. It's not so easy to solve though.

[go to top]