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. rhaksw+s5[view] [source] 2023-08-15 05:05:41
>>dang+p1
It is a secret if the system does not inform the poster it's been penalized.
◧◩◪◨
4. predic+O8[view] [source] 2023-08-15 05:41:37
>>rhaksw+s5
There's a lot of user hostile moderation practices that occur on this site, manual and automatic. They're not often, or really at all, discussed. Some of them don't work well, and haven't for as long as they've existed.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. dang+mi[view] [source] 2023-08-15 07:28:10
>>predic+O8
I don't want us to be user hostile. Can you link to some examples?
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. johngl+gU[view] [source] 2023-08-15 13:10:35
>>dang+mi
I would consider any moderation action that isn't visible to users to be user hostile.

If you're going to censor someone, you owe it to them to be honest about what you're doing to them.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. DamonH+jD1[view] [source] 2023-08-15 17:00:33
>>johngl+gU
You possibly haven't experienced how devious and determined and dishonest and unpleasant some bad actors are, including SPAMmers.

(Even when doing the RightThing(TM) would probably be easier...)

And, BTW, I occasionally get blocked by the mechanisms here, even though not doing anything bad, but understand that there is a trade-off.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. johngl+7Q1[view] [source] 2023-08-15 17:56:01
>>DamonH+jD1
I am fully aware of the issue.

That's one of the costs with having a public website.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. DamonH+7x2[view] [source] 2023-08-15 21:57:48
>>johngl+7Q1
And that cost is so high that over the ~25Y+* that I have been running my own sites I have not had UGC on any of them, other then a very brief experiment, which showed me what utter relentless turds the bad actors can be.

Operators of public sites should NOT have to pay that tax. So you are best are not fully aware of the actual cost, IMHO.

Congrats to HN for striking a reasonable pragmatic balance.

*I had some of the first live (non-academic) Internet connectivity in the UK, and the very very first packets were hacking attempts...

[go to top]