zlacker

[parent] [thread] 5 comments
1. icarou+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-08-15 09:40:50
This is unfortunately quite a common tactic being used by people opposed to the OSA. Recently there was an article in the i newspaper which claimed you have to show ID to order pizza online, and it's because of the OSA. Turns out their source was a misleading tweet by a political activist who had ordered from Deliveroo or similar and were seeing the usual message shown to people who order alcohol. Nothing to do with the OSA at all.
replies(2): >>Mindwi+b1 >>crtasm+8e
2. Mindwi+b1[view] [source] 2025-08-15 09:53:10
>>icarou+(OP)
Hmm. New account, no history before this thread. Not at all suspicious.

So, DSIT, Age Verification Industry Association or Molly Rose astroturfer?

replies(2): >>dambi0+W2 >>mattma+Z2
◧◩
3. dambi0+W2[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-08-15 10:11:02
>>Mindwi+b1
A new account would tend not to have any history.

It seems uncharitable to immediately assume bad faith.

What is it about the content of the comment you disagree with?

I think it provides a further example to the parent post that regardless of what one thinks about the Act, the discourse isn’t entirely neutral.

◧◩
4. mattma+Z2[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-08-15 10:11:58
>>Mindwi+b1
There's a bunch of HNers who always rotate accounts. It's a little annoying but a green commentator in itself doesn't mean an astro turfer.

It's also a perfectly reasonable point, you just don't agree with it.

replies(1): >>amanap+lm
5. crtasm+8e[view] [source] 2025-08-15 11:50:51
>>icarou+(OP)
So the journalist or their editor didn't do any basic fact checking, that's also a sadly common tactic.
◧◩◪
6. amanap+lm[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-08-15 12:48:50
>>mattma+Z2
I believe rotating accounts is against the policies of the site, although I totally understand the impulse.
[go to top]