4 ms·

Was this killed by flags? What happened?

jessaustin 10y ago
It appeared so, but then I clicked "vouch" and it came back. Of course, this may just be a sort of hell-vouch, visible only to me? [EDIT:] No, not a hell-vouch; it still appears in incognito. [EDIT 2:] ...and now it's flagged again. Philosophy on HN casts pearls before swine. If I were illiterate I would call it "ironic". A simple essay that addresses matters of broad public discussion (certainly on HN) in slightly idiosyncratic fashion (not rude, not disrespectful, only a bit out of the rut of banal everyday discourse), is immediately round-filed by the right-thinking brigade? Could there be a more convincing proof of TFA's title?
- ericjang 10y ago
  How much karma does one need to vouch?
- justinpombrio 10y ago
  I suspect it was flagged by left-thinking people. I'd flag it if I could: in the second paragraph the author conflates transgender people with postgenderists calling for the abolition of gender. None of the trans people I know believe anything like that. It's possible there's some subtle argument that's going over my head, but either way this article seems like poorly grounded flamewar fodder.
  - eximius 10y ago
    I think he was saying that transgenderists don't take things to the full logical conclusion of postgenderism. Not that I agree with that in any way, I just think its more representative of his claim.
  - jessaustin 10y ago
    Haha, every line is a point, when viewed sideways. The reactionary "whew I've made it in now close the bathroom door" position you ascribe to certain "T" people wouldn't be shared by all that many "Q" folk, although it is of a piece with some "G" voices elsewhere in this thread. There is a natural tension in any political coalition, between those who join for ethical reasons and those who are primarily self-interested (and, one supposes, those for whom the whole movement is only a political tool). Do we see some fraying around the edges? Perhaps TFA is flamewar fodder, but that says more about this forum than about TFA itself, which when taken on its own terms is interesting and imaginative.
    - justinpombrio 10y ago
      > The reactionary "whew I've made it in now close the bathroom door" position you ascribe to certain "T" people To be clear, I only ascribed a lack of uniform belief in "a voluntary abolition of gender, rendered possible by recent scientific progress in biotechnology and reproductive technologies", and thought it strange that the author assumed that trans people shared this vision.
- zzleeper 10y ago
  How can you click vouch? (I thought I had enough karma to do all the extra ops). I don't agree w/the article but that's why comments and voting are for, not flagging which feels almost as censoring.
  - detaro 10y ago
    vouch is only available is the article is flag-killed, so it normally isn't visible (even if the [flagged] mark already is there, but you can still comment). I assume the limit is the same as for flagging (500?)
  - jessaustin 10y ago
    It's just another link on the line below the title. After a certain amount of time has elapsed, I don't think the option is available anymore, so that may be the case here. Also I seem to recall that there may be a random component to display of this option? There was some talk about "meta-flagging", i.e. the mods would review vouch actions and penalize the vouching abilities of crap vouchers. It's not clear that ever happened, however. The other possibility is that you're simply below the threshold. 9 days ago a user with ~1800 karma reported having vouched, so probably at some point before you get there you'll start seeing this option.

It appeared so, but then I clicked "vouch" and it came back. Of course, this may just be a sort of hell-vouch, visible only to me? [EDIT:] No, not a hell-vouch; it still appears in incognito. [EDIT 2:] ...and now it's flagged again. Philosophy on HN casts pearls before swine. If I were illiterate I would call it "ironic". A simple essay that addresses matters of broad public discussion (certainly on HN) in slightly idiosyncratic fashion (not rude, not disrespectful, only a bit out of the rut of banal everyday discourse), is immediately round-filed by the right-thinking brigade? Could there be a more convincing proof of TFA's title?

ericjang 10y ago
How much karma does one need to vouch?
justinpombrio 10y ago
I suspect it was flagged by left-thinking people. I'd flag it if I could: in the second paragraph the author conflates transgender people with postgenderists calling for the abolition of gender. None of the trans people I know believe anything like that. It's possible there's some subtle argument that's going over my head, but either way this article seems like poorly grounded flamewar fodder.
- eximius 10y ago
  I think he was saying that transgenderists don't take things to the full logical conclusion of postgenderism. Not that I agree with that in any way, I just think its more representative of his claim.
- jessaustin 10y ago
  Haha, every line is a point, when viewed sideways. The reactionary "whew I've made it in now close the bathroom door" position you ascribe to certain "T" people wouldn't be shared by all that many "Q" folk, although it is of a piece with some "G" voices elsewhere in this thread. There is a natural tension in any political coalition, between those who join for ethical reasons and those who are primarily self-interested (and, one supposes, those for whom the whole movement is only a political tool). Do we see some fraying around the edges? Perhaps TFA is flamewar fodder, but that says more about this forum than about TFA itself, which when taken on its own terms is interesting and imaginative.
  - justinpombrio 10y ago
    > The reactionary "whew I've made it in now close the bathroom door" position you ascribe to certain "T" people To be clear, I only ascribed a lack of uniform belief in "a voluntary abolition of gender, rendered possible by recent scientific progress in biotechnology and reproductive technologies", and thought it strange that the author assumed that trans people shared this vision.
zzleeper 10y ago
How can you click vouch? (I thought I had enough karma to do all the extra ops). I don't agree w/the article but that's why comments and voting are for, not flagging which feels almost as censoring.
- detaro 10y ago
  vouch is only available is the article is flag-killed, so it normally isn't visible (even if the [flagged] mark already is there, but you can still comment). I assume the limit is the same as for flagging (500?)
- jessaustin 10y ago
  It's just another link on the line below the title. After a certain amount of time has elapsed, I don't think the option is available anymore, so that may be the case here. Also I seem to recall that there may be a random component to display of this option? There was some talk about "meta-flagging", i.e. the mods would review vouch actions and penalize the vouching abilities of crap vouchers. It's not clear that ever happened, however. The other possibility is that you're simply below the threshold. 9 days ago a user with ~1800 karma reported having vouched, so probably at some point before you get there you'll start seeing this option.