Moderating something like HN is a very hard job. Gratitude .
(I'm not saying HN should do exactly the same thing, but one example is Slashdot's system where a comment can get downvoted in a way that tags it specifically as trolling/offtopic/whatever - https://slashdot.org/faq/mod-metamod.shtml seems to describe it alright)
So yes downvotes for mere disagreements are okay here.
https://hn.algolia.com/?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.backblaze.com%2F...
Here are some past explanations of how we approach this. If anyone reads those and still has a question that isn't answered there, I'd be happy to take a crack at it.
>>23959679 (July 2020)
>>22902490 (April 2020)
>>21607844 (Nov 2019)
>>17014869 (May 2018)
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...
Empty comments can be ok if they're positive. There's nothing wrong with submitting a comment saying just "Thanks." What we especially discourage are comments that are empty and negative—comments that are mere name-calling.
Shadowbanning is something we only do for either (1) spammers or (2) new accounts that are showing signs of being repeat abusers. This seems to be roughly the correct tradeoff.
If other users didn't think this submission about HN rules was interesting, it wouldn't be upvoted.
More discussions/description from dang here: >>26998308
It's worth remembering that HN is a common law system. If you want to nerd out about what the real, fine-grained guidelines are, follow Dan's comments; they're the site jurisprudence.
A corollary to the humor thing: insubstantial comments are problematic when they're negative and less problematic when they're positive or encouraging. That's a principle that goes all the way back to Graham. So you're generally going to be fine attempting a cheerful joke than you are trying for a sly dunk.
I don't mind it when someone calls it out with a "/s" or "/jk" (/sarcasm, /joking).
Related: humor at work: https://hbr.org/2020/07/sarcasm-self-deprecation-and-inside-...
https://www.madmagazine.com/blog/2014/08/22/don-martin-foneb...
[1]: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
[2]: >>2403589
Unlike more turgid efforts: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/governance/policies/part...
https://github.com/minimaxir/hacker-news-undocumented#flame-...
I'll still say that the instances of HN moderation with which I have the greatest reservations tend to resemble what antisthenes describes above: poorly-conceived articles which would themselves be legitimately flagged and admonished if posted as HN comments to which the rather understandably heated or snippy response instead draws moderator action.
And yes, HN mods can't read everything or be everywhere,[1] so moderation is inconsistent, though I know what it strives toward.
And I can often identify how a response might have been improved or what elements run aground on HN's policies. I'm not convinced that the occasional exception or leniency would utterly wreck the ship (though having seen what, in dang's words things that strongly encourage that a "thread will lose its mind"[2] there's some reason for caution). But in a world where, to borrow from Tim Minchin, there's frequently a contingent which "keeps firing off clichés with startling precision like a sniper using bollocks for ammunition", diplomacy dikes do on occasion break.[3]
And tone-policing that, particularly unilaterally, strikes me as a greater wrong.
________________________________
Notes:
1. Which you've noted, 2 days ago <>>37225175 > and eight years ago: <>>9979719 >. Another HN perennial...
2. <>>22176686 > and <>>17689715 >.
3. Tim Minchin, "Storm" (2009), <https://www.musixmatch.com/lyrics/Tim-Minchin/Storm>. Animated video: <https://yewtu.be/watch?v=HhGuXCuDb1U> and live performance: <https://yewtu.be/watch?v=KtYkyB35zkk>.
<>>37256792 >
<>>34032058 >
<>>27307680 >
The duplicates-detection code is deliberately porous: <>>7650172 >
But overwhelming the front page with multiple takes on a story (e.g., the Tver aircraft downing yesterday) would be tiresome, and even multiple takes on what's essentially the same story over a span of a few days or weeks can get tedious.
The critical qualifying exception is "significant new information": <>>8406835 >
Around 15% or more of HN front-page submissions are to paywalled and/or general news sites.
(I've classified the latter in my analysis of historic HN front-page activity, I haven't gone through to specifically note paywalled sites.)
And tightening paywalls can have a large impact on submissions. After the New York Times strengthened its paywall in 2019, HN front-page submissions fell to about 25% of their previous level.
<>>36918251 >
One synthesis is this: wise strategies depend on the audience composition and time scale.
More people should learn wise ways to quantify future rewards. Reinforcement learning, economics, and finance cover some simple ways. One way is a constant discount factor, but it is not the only nor best way.
A general search showing links to rationale / reasons: <by:dang please don't https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=>
You can also typically search Algolia for "by:dang" + the text used to describe what guideline was transgressed.
As I've noted elsewhere, HN operates on frictions and nudges: <>>37137757 >
And you can always email mods for clarification, as has been noted several times already in this thread. Dang explicitly includes this option when banning established accounts in many cases.
In large part though, HN presumes adult behaviour, which includes the ability and inclination to research for yourself what you might have done wrong.
If it bothers you that you can't figure out precisely why you were throttled, an email to the admins expressing a desire for UI around that might not be unwelcome.
>>35921579 (May 2023)
>>32769278 (Sept 2022)
>>30390204 (Feb 2022)
>>26185464 (Feb 2021)
>>20342064 (July 2019)
We're happy to take the rate limit off once we have reason to believe that an account is using HN in the intended spirit and will keep doing so. Unfortunately your account is still breaking the site guidelines badly. You posted several instances of nationalistic flamebait just today:
and religious flamebait the day before: >>37259499 .
You've also frequently been crossing into personal attack and name-calling:
In fact your account breaks the guidelines so frequently that it's past the line at which we'd ban an account, not just rate-limit it. I'm not going to ban you right now because it wouldn't feel fair to do that in response to a question about being rate-limited. But if you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules from now on, we'd appreciate it.
If you build up a track record of using HN in the intended spirit for a while, you'd be welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll be happy to take a look and hopefully remove the rate limit.
One of my personal faves was responding to what struck me as a somewhat unthinking response to the true reality at the time of the destruction of Pompeii and Herculaneum by the 79 CE eruption of Mount Vesuvius, here: <>>22132283 >.
Another addressed common tropes from Wealth of Nations: <>>17965681 >.
I've increasingly taken to responding to highly disinformational or misinformed commentary by simply linking an authoritative rebutting item, occasionally quoting the specific element that addresses the point in question. E.g., <>>33999668 > and <>>27284014 >.
I'll also, when the argument seems to be circling rather than progressing, leave as my last response (if any) a link to a previous comment of mine in the thread, to make clear that I'd already addressed that point.
And much of that is not with the goal of convincing the person I'm responding to directly, but in addressing the wider audience. Though occasionally the former seems to occur: <>>36550938 >.
Plenty of stories with political overlap [1] still get discussed on HN. Your list seems cherry-picked to me - presumably because those are the topics you dislike, and mostly people overemphasize, and are more likely to notice, the data points they dislike [2].
I'm not sure where you got the idea that HN doesn't have rules, but it does, and they certainly exclude abusing other members [3], doxxing [4], etc.
[1] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...
[2] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
[3] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
[4] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
From my own recent history, this subthread: <>>37115294 >.