zlacker

[parent] [thread] 20 comments
1. Albert+(OP)[view] [source] 2024-08-27 16:54:42
That's the gospel, for sure.

However, look at the dead comments here and, for each, tell us why it would turn HN into a "cesspit."

replies(8): >>margal+O3 >>BolexN+14 >>gosub1+y6 >>sangno+ha >>DonHop+Qc >>icehaw+Pd >>jasonl+hh >>ekidd+Kh
2. margal+O3[view] [source] 2024-08-27 17:10:24
>>Albert+(OP)
> However, look at the dead comments here and, for each, tell us why it would turn HN into a "cesspit."

This is an impossible task and you know it. Asking your opponents to enumerate every dead comment on a thread with hundreds of comments is not approaching the issue in good faith.

Looking at a selection of dead comments on this thread, I see flame-baiting on israel/palestine, flame-baiting on trans and racial issues, assorted comments whose content might have been acceptable if it wasn't 40% profanity by wordcount, a bunch of unnecessary personal attacks, and assorted people redefining words and then asserting that only their new definition is the correct one.

I see basically nothing that would improve HN if it were not dead. I see a lot that would make HN actively worse if it were not dead.

replies(1): >>Albert+46
3. BolexN+14[view] [source] 2024-08-27 17:11:13
>>Albert+(OP)
I'm sure we can pick and choose good/bad examples from every thread, but I for one definitely feel the bar for civility/respect here is way higher than virtually anywhere else, so I'm choosing to believe this current system contributes to that and that the pros outweigh the cons.

After reddit's nonsense last summer I appreciate HN more than ever. If it means the moderation is a bit "too strict" then so be it. That was also the case on some of reddit's (and other sites') best communities. /r/AskHistorians immediately comes to mind.

◧◩
4. Albert+46[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-08-27 17:20:25
>>margal+O3
> This is an impossible task and you know it. Asking your opponents to enumerate every dead comment on a thread with hundreds of comments is not approaching the issue in good faith.

No, it's not impossible. I count 15 dead now, not "hundreds" (when I said that originally, it was about 5).

Let's make it easy: why does bigbacaloa's go, and all the others stay?

replies(2): >>useful+L9 >>soneca+0b
5. gosub1+y6[view] [source] 2024-08-27 17:22:20
>>Albert+(OP)
Broken windows theory: actively moderating is precisely what keeps shit posters away. There's no gain from doing it when their posts are removed so they give up quickly.
◧◩◪
6. useful+L9[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-08-27 17:39:56
>>Albert+46
I was prepared to disagree, but actually I don't see what the problem is with that post.

Here it is, so others don't have to dig around for it. It appears to have been a top level comment.

"This pseudo-apology is the worst sort of political expediency. He did what the government asked while denying doing it, now apologizes for it to curry favor with the rightwing world he alienated. It's like the NY Times pushing the weapons of mass destruction narrative during the Iraq war and later running long articles about what bad journalism that was."

replies(2): >>soneca+Sa >>gerry_+fe
7. sangno+ha[view] [source] 2024-08-27 17:42:36
>>Albert+(OP)
I didn't flag any of them; I do not owe you an explanation on behalf of the flaggers.

Conversely - why didn't you vouch for each of the dead comments, if they are so great?

replies(1): >>megous+Kd
◧◩◪◨
8. soneca+Sa[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-08-27 17:45:37
>>useful+L9
This post is dead not because this post was flagged. It is dead because the user was shadow-banned some time ago.

Whatever they post now shows up as dead

replies(1): >>immibi+Of
◧◩◪
9. soneca+0b[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-08-27 17:45:55
>>Albert+46
Because of this (and I agree it should be banned):

>>37421874

10. DonHop+Qc[view] [source] 2024-08-27 17:53:58
>>Albert+(OP)
Look at the posting history of the comment posters, not just the comment.

In many cases it's not the particular comment, it's the particular poster who is shadow-banned, and all of their comments are dead on arrival (to everyone but themselves, the definition of shadow banned). But people with showdead=true and enough karma can vouch for them to resurrect them if they're worthwhile.

◧◩
11. megous+Kd[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-08-27 17:57:39
>>sangno+ha
Vouching doesn't unflag reasonable comments.
replies(1): >>sangno+Fe
12. icehaw+Pd[view] [source] 2024-08-27 17:57:53
>>Albert+(OP)
Sure I'll do it, as long as you agree to pay me $1000/hr, 2 hour minimum-- up front, to do your work for you.

No refunds.

replies(1): >>Albert+pt
◧◩◪◨
13. gerry_+fe[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-08-27 17:59:51
>>useful+L9
Another point of evidence of why HN is great. Even reading this point in this argument had me thinking and wondering why it was banned and then the moderator comment right below (but can't be replied to?) explains the reasoning.

One of the best uses of HN for me is watching my brain jump to conclusions only to have them slapped down by a well thought out counter argument.

This forum isn't perfect but I haven't found a better public discussion board on the internet. Hat tip to the moderators and others making this happen. Your work is appreciated.

◧◩◪
14. sangno+Fe[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-08-27 18:01:43
>>megous+Kd
https://www.ycombinator.com/blog/two-hn-announcements
◧◩◪◨⬒
15. immibi+Of[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-08-27 18:06:44
>>soneca+Sa
If the comment is not a comment that should be dead, then the shadow-ban is not helping HN.
16. jasonl+hh[view] [source] 2024-08-27 18:14:23
>>Albert+(OP)
Either it's from someone who happily continues to break rules and is effectively shadow banned because they continue to cause problems and break rules, or the comment doesn't contribute well enough to the topic. This could mean it's just being insulting, or off-topic.

In short: Nothing of value was lost. Especially since you can toggle it on.

17. ekidd+Kh[view] [source] 2024-08-27 18:17:23
>>Albert+(OP)
Sometimes, the actual mods in charge of the site have heavily penalized certain accounts, either manually or via an algorithm (I don't know the details). The comments posted by these accounts appear to start off "dead", though they may be vouched for by high-karma users. This will make those comments appear normally.

I've moderated a number of forums in my time. And the hardest users to deal with are the ones that insist on breaking the rules 10% of the time, and who refuse to stop. Even if they contribute positively much of the rest of the time, they create far too much work.

(Also, I have zero interest in participating in unmoderated forums. Unmoderated forums are either overrun by spam, or by users who somehow manage to spend 50 hours a week flaming people. Look at any small-town online newspaper where the same 5 people bicker endlessly after every single news story. And if I don't like how a forum is moderated, I find another one.)

replies(1): >>breck+GS
◧◩
18. Albert+pt[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-08-27 19:10:40
>>icehaw+Pd
> to do your work for you

It's not my work, since I'm not the one defending putting some comments to death while leaving lots of other, equally stupid comments up.

replies(1): >>icehaw+Ze1
◧◩
19. breck+GS[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-08-27 21:18:42
>>ekidd+Kh
> And the hardest users to deal with are the ones that insist on breaking the rules 10% of the time, and who refuse to stop. Even if they contribute positively much of the rest of the time, they create far too much work.

There is _always_ a technical solution here. If you can't figure it out, keep thinking. There's never a reason to ban/moderate your core users for 10% rule violations. Instead, that shows a weakness of the software. More transparency helps.

◧◩◪
20. icehaw+Ze1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-08-27 23:53:14
>>Albert+pt
If you have a point you want to make, just make it. Comments like your previous one are asking people to do work for you.
replies(1): >>Albert+UF1
◧◩◪◨
21. Albert+UF1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-08-28 05:25:59
>>icehaw+Ze1
I think my "points" as you put them are all over this thread. I don't plan to ask you to do anything for me.
[go to top]