4 ms·

You must be a new HN user. Few weeks ago HN front page was full of political/election topics. They weren't flagged, and even some of them were heavily upvoted.

You must be a new HN user. Few weeks ago HN front page was full of political/election topics. They weren't flagged, and even some of them were heavily upvoted. But these submissions were mostly anti-Trump. Now, when most submissions are anti-Clinton, they are being flagged and removed. Those which despite that are able to get many upvotes, are being silently hidden from front page. Moderators also add "a moderation downweight" to these submissions (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12715332 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12715332). WikiLeaks submissions are particularly targeted, as these are pure facts, which cannot be easily dismissed in comment threads.

piotrjurkiewicz 10y ago
And here we go: this story has just been delisted from front page, despite it (now, 2016-10-31T20:34:43+00:00) has 21 points and isn't flagged. I checked the next 7 pages as well, and it isn't present there either.
- detaro 10y ago
  Flagging affects ranking before it is visible (it's actually a fairly new feature that flagging is shown at all before the story is killed and closed for new comments)
- thisisdallas 10y ago
  Yes, and it obviously has to do with tech. I thought hackers news was a little more open minded and generally a more intelligent community. Guess some users and mods/admins aren't...
  - 58 10y ago
    I'm with you. It's disappointing that for whatever reason Clinton in particular is barely discussed on HN. What's come out in the last few weeks should be an enormous, shocking news story (especially if you've been living in the MSM bubble), and yet every submission gets knocked off the front page instantly.
grzm 10y ago
"You must be a new HN user. Few weeks ago HN front page was full of political/election topics." Yes, I am a relatively new commenter (24 days). I started following comments at a particularly heated time. And the community aspects of the site are very interesting to me, in traction between users, community policing, the behavior of the moderators, how people choose to trust some sources and distrust others, how people who disagree can constructively discuss the contentious points. This last is particularly important to me, especially given the polarized political climate in the US. I'm not prepared to weigh in on whether or to what extent there's user bias as to which stories or comments are getting flagged or down voted. I think it's a worthwhile question that should be examined analytically, with more than anecdotes. Also, I don't know how the flamewar detection algorithms work, which causes some submissions to be removed from appearing on the front page. And based on what I've seen of the moderators, I give HN the benefit of the doubt that this system doesn't specifically include a political bias. As for "moderation downweight", do you have some links for discussion on this feature? Personally, I see no evidence that the moderators are actively biasing discussion other than trying to keep things civil and substantive. As for user flags and down votes, those are reflective of the community, and I say that without judging whether it's the correct behavior or not. Communities play a role in shaping themselves. How that shaping occurs is also up for discussion. As for changes in flagging aggressiveness, I think people here in general want to be tolerant (explaining the early political/election topics) and have been getting increasingly tired of seeing the same topics getting rehashed (explaining the more aggressive flagging of political topics now). Anyway, I am new so maybe this is all crap :) Thanks for taking the time for reading to this point. What do you think? Fair analysis? Bunk?
- piotrjurkiewicz 10y ago
  > As for "moderation downweight", do you have some links for discussion on this feature? I pasted a wrong link in parentheses next to the fragment about moderation downweight. Here is a link to a comment where moderator admits it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12715332 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12715332
  - grzm 10y ago

piotrjurkiewicz 10y ago

And here we go: this story has just been delisted from front page, despite it (now, 2016-10-31T20:34:43+00:00) has 21 points and isn't flagged. I checked the next 7 pages as well, and it isn't present there either.

detaro 10y ago
Flagging affects ranking before it is visible (it's actually a fairly new feature that flagging is shown at all before the story is killed and closed for new comments)
thisisdallas 10y ago
Yes, and it obviously has to do with tech. I thought hackers news was a little more open minded and generally a more intelligent community. Guess some users and mods/admins aren't...
- 58 10y ago
  I'm with you. It's disappointing that for whatever reason Clinton in particular is barely discussed on HN. What's come out in the last few weeks should be an enormous, shocking news story (especially if you've been living in the MSM bubble), and yet every submission gets knocked off the front page instantly.

grzm 10y ago

"You must be a new HN user. Few weeks ago HN front page was full of political/election topics." Yes, I am a relatively new commenter (24 days). I started following comments at a particularly heated time. And the community aspects of the site are very interesting to me, in traction between users, community policing, the behavior of the moderators, how people choose to trust some sources and distrust others, how people who disagree can constructively discuss the contentious points. This last is particularly important to me, especially given the polarized political climate in the US. I'm not prepared to weigh in on whether or to what extent there's user bias as to which stories or comments are getting flagged or down voted. I think it's a worthwhile question that should be examined analytically, with more than anecdotes. Also, I don't know how the flamewar detection algorithms work, which causes some submissions to be removed from appearing on the front page. And based on what I've seen of the moderators, I give HN the benefit of the doubt that this system doesn't specifically include a political bias. As for "moderation downweight", do you have some links for discussion on this feature? Personally, I see no evidence that the moderators are actively biasing discussion other than trying to keep things civil and substantive. As for user flags and down votes, those are reflective of the community, and I say that without judging whether it's the correct behavior or not. Communities play a role in shaping themselves. How that shaping occurs is also up for discussion. As for changes in flagging aggressiveness, I think people here in general want to be tolerant (explaining the early political/election topics) and have been getting increasingly tired of seeing the same topics getting rehashed (explaining the more aggressive flagging of political topics now). Anyway, I am new so maybe this is all crap :) Thanks for taking the time for reading to this point. What do you think? Fair analysis? Bunk?

piotrjurkiewicz 10y ago
> As for "moderation downweight", do you have some links for discussion on this feature? I pasted a wrong link in parentheses next to the fragment about moderation downweight. Here is a link to a comment where moderator admits it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12715332 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12715332
- grzm 10y ago