zlacker

[parent] [thread] 2 comments
1. aaomid+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-08-15 04:24:05
This forum never said they’re a free speech haven.
replies(1): >>dang+jb2
2. dang+jb2[view] [source] 2023-08-15 19:55:16
>>aaomid+(OP)
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.

replies(1): >>aaomid+gw9
◧◩
3. aaomid+gw9[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-08-17 19:30:38
>>dang+jb2
I personally think you guys have it mostly figured out. Kudos.
[go to top]