zlacker

[parent] [thread] 6 comments
1. dang+(OP)[view] [source] 2016-12-06 07:14:54
I always appreciate your comments, and the ones I've seen in this thread have been an interesting take on the question. Just one point though: there's no radical reconfiguration here. Undoubtedly it would be if we were going to make it permanent, but when we said "for one week" we really meant for one week. IMO HN's community system has orders of magnitude more hysteresis than would be radically affected by a one-week change, though I guess I could be wrong about that.
replies(2): >>yarou+pc >>gravyp+Yn
2. yarou+pc[view] [source] 2016-12-06 10:21:44
>>dang+(OP)
Speaking of reconfiguration, why not buff the controversy penalty instead of outright banning political discussion?

Couldn't you also enable an enhanced slow mode on threads that seem political in nature? Maybe something like the "hate tax" system proposed here[1].

I feel as though political topics tend to generate a knee-jerk response in people, especially when they are in an...shall we say, altered state of mind. The more controversial a topic is, the slower the pace of discussion should be IMHO. Exponentially so.

[1] https://zedshaw.com/archive/ragel-state-charts/

3. gravyp+Yn[view] [source] 2016-12-06 13:10:05
>>dang+(OP)
> Undoubtedly it would be if we were going to make it permanent, but when we said "for one week" we really meant for one week.

If you had no intent to push this for longer, why even try it in the first place? What if I, and everyone else in this thread, is wrong and this turns out to be a magnificent idea and makes the site a better for everyone.

Now since this is so amazing, why not make it perminent?

The cynical in me is also asking, who gets to judge if this is a success or a failure? The community? The vocal portion of the community? The YC staff? You?

I trust none of those groups with as important of a disition as this nor do I want a precident set on any social media platform I use that a specific topic can be completely banned from discussion.

replies(2): >>DanBC+8q >>dang+JF1
◧◩
4. DanBC+8q[view] [source] [discussion] 2016-12-06 13:32:41
>>gravyp+Yn
How do you think this is going to affect you and how you comment on HN?

Searching[0] comments for user:gravypod and stem word fragments like divers, sexi, raci, or discr return 0 hits. Searching for other hot button[1] words like abortion, jew, islam, muslim, gun, SJW, leftist, clinton, hillary, trump, right, women, Israel, iraq, vote etc etc return 0[2] hits.

What political discussions are you having on HN that you won't still be able to have? Can you link to a comment you've made that you think you won't be able to make during this experiment?

[0] It's possible that I'm using the Algolia search wrong, but I can return other comments by gravypod.

[1] I'm not saying these are always bad comments! But if I'm looking for the political comments that dang is talking about these searches should return them.

[2] Some hits, but nothing relevant, for vote and right.

replies(1): >>gravyp+Ha1
◧◩◪
5. gravyp+Ha1[view] [source] [discussion] 2016-12-06 19:05:48
>>DanBC+8q
Speaking against bad ideas isn't something I do only for my own benifit and I surely hope others feel this way.

By the way, I use firearm to avoid negative connotation with gun.

◧◩
6. dang+JF1[view] [source] [discussion] 2016-12-06 23:37:04
>>gravyp+Yn
> why even try it in the first place?

For the reasons I gave: (1) taking a one-week breather from the kind of stories that erupt into flamewars seemed like a good way to remind us all of the values of this site (intellectual curiosity and civil discussion), and (2) we hoped we'd learn some things. As indeed we have.

replies(1): >>gravyp+SO1
◧◩◪
7. gravyp+SO1[view] [source] [discussion] 2016-12-07 01:28:35
>>dang+JF1
> the kind of stories that erupt into flamewars

Should we also ban discussion on Javascript frameworks? How about we ban all discussion on the founder of Soylent? Those threads tend to lay on the side of ideological bullying.

> seemed like a good way to remind us all of the values of this site (intellectual curiosity and civil discussion)

No sufficiently intelligent group would avoid the biological imperatives that set in motion the basis for political events or discussion.

> we hoped we'd learn some things. As indeed we have

Comeing from a company as YC this is very scary. I'm glad that it has become evident that this, at least currently, won't fly with a large portion of the community. In the future I see the "innocently" minded as being the playthings of you and your friends at YC.

[go to top]