zlacker

My experience with dang have been limited to him accusing me of making a personal swipe and me trying convince him that's not the case.

I think sometimes overly sensitive moderation is not good.

>>kentra+(OP)
For what it's worth, my only interaction with dang was being gently chided for a slightly glib dismissal at the top of a comment I made. The phrasing I used is very common (and treated as harmless) where I was brought up in Yorkshire. But he was right; without the benefit of that context it came over as rude. I've been a bit more careful since.

Thanks, dang. A triumph of moderation.

>>pmyteh+w
That's been my experience too. It's the only online forum where the style of moderation has made me think twice about what I said.

>>kentra+(OP)
I've gotten into a couple of arguments with dang and have never found him to be unfair, although I do think he sometimes interprets criticism of the site or the community as an insult to him personally.

That said, it's better to have moderators who care than moderators who don't.

>>kentra+(OP)
Usually when I read a comment like this, I find that the commenter is grossly misrepresenting the situation, usually by leaving out important details. But in this case, yes, that seems like an accurate description: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20467198

Personally, I like Dan's "Nietzschean flamewars" phrasing, and I sort of agree that "trying to get him to conform to slave morality" was a personal swipe. But if so, only barely. This could well be an example of overly sensitive moderation.

The real problem with that thread (in my opinion) is that Rayiner's comment was allowed to stay flagged to death. One might not agree with his opinion, but it's a viewpoint worthy of reply (as you did) rather than censorship.