4 ms·

You can choose to believe the anecdotes of an Uber employee who presumably is drinking from the Kool Aid, or media reports that demonize Uber and don't report o

You can choose to believe the anecdotes of an Uber employee who presumably is drinking from the Kool Aid, or media reports that demonize Uber and don't report on any of the good things that have been going on.

dang 9y ago
It's easy to understand why you'd want to defend your employer and coworkers, and there's nothing wrong with doing so. Unfortunately, you've broken the HN guidelines repeatedly while doing it. You've also used this account almost exclusively to get involved in flamewars. For those reasons I've banned this account. If you don't want to be banned on HN, you can email us at hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe you'll follow the site rules in the future. From a moderation point of view this has nothing to do with who you happen to work for. It hurts your employer to have you defending it in such uncivil ways in public, though, so they're probably better off with this account banned, too.
- employee8001 9y ago
  Right. So I civilly answer allegations that uber employees are somehow unethical or complicit in harassment or unethical behavior, and the perpetrators of this libel are safe, and I'm the one that's banned. Got it. You may not agree with what I wrote but I stand by everything I wrote as being respectful. Except to Mike Isaac who has an agenda against Uber with his reporting. Besides that, can you point to a single comment that was "uncivil"?
  - dang 9y ago
    Yes, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14355444 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14355444 was uncivil and we warned you about it. In my experience, users that continue to make personal attacks after we ask them not to don't have much desire to use HN as intended (which involves, among other things, being respectful to others). If we've misassessed that in your case, it should be easy enough to clear up. I explained how upthread.
    - employee8001 9y ago
      Everything I wrote was civil, even the one about the slave. I didn't accuse them of anything it's just your narrowmindedness. I even had defenders on that thread. Time for a reality check, Dan. To call my responses to Uber threads as "flame wars" is a joke. I was giving my insider view on things every single time, in the face of wildly ridiculous statements. If those constitute "flame wars" then your "power" has gone to your head. And, uh, no, I won't be begging for an unban, that is preposterous. I was the only one giving civil and informative posts about inside Uber but I guess since anyone defending Uber is "flaming", then enjoy your echo chamber of Uber hate and misinformation.
- PeCaN 9y ago
  Reposting the deleted comment for people who don't have showdead on: > Right. So I civilly answer allegations that uber employees are somehow unethical or complicit in harassment or unethical behavior, and the perpetrators of this libel are safe, and I'm the one that's banned. Got it. > You may not agree with what I wrote but I stand by everything I wrote as being respectful. Except to Mike Isaac who has an agenda against Uber with his reporting. Besides that, can you point to a single comment that was "uncivil"? Reposting because frankly, there hasn't been anything uncivil. Just dang's agenda, as usual.
  - dang 9y ago
    The account posted Also, it's my pleasure to say "fuck you, Mike Isaac" before editing that out when another user objected. That's obviously uncivil. But in this case the larger problem is that it's (more or less) a single-purpose account for getting into flamewars about Uber. That's not how this site is supposed to be used. Edit: We'd be happy to unban you as well if you'd simply promise to be civil in the future. One of the tentacles of my "agenda" is personally unkilling your high-quality technical comments so HN readers can enjoy them. It would be nice if we could just publish them in the first place.
    - rogerdonaldson 9y ago
      "But in this case the larger problem is that it's (more or less) a single-purpose account for getting into flamewars about Uber. That's not how this site is supposed to be used." So a person cannot give opinion in a civil way, and highlight information which was not known to others? It is "mandatory" to talk about multiple topics at HN? How do you define "flamewars"? Just giving your opinion about a topic, discussing, debating is flamewars? Then one could say the entire world of comments on HN is flamewars, since most comments discuss and debate topics. I believe arguing your opinion civilly, giving reasons etc, should be okay, regardless of whether you talk of only one topic -- or have a particular opinion on one side of the debate. Most users of the site typically have some view which falls on one side on any debate. But they defend it and give their reasons civilly. Thats the whole point, isnt it? I have read employee8000's posts and they all seem civil. Except for the one which was changed. But that particular comment was wrong, his other comments on this thread are very civil IMHO.

dang 9y ago

It's easy to understand why you'd want to defend your employer and coworkers, and there's nothing wrong with doing so. Unfortunately, you've broken the HN guidelines repeatedly while doing it. You've also used this account almost exclusively to get involved in flamewars. For those reasons I've banned this account. If you don't want to be banned on HN, you can email us at hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe you'll follow the site rules in the future. From a moderation point of view this has nothing to do with who you happen to work for. It hurts your employer to have you defending it in such uncivil ways in public, though, so they're probably better off with this account banned, too.

employee8001 9y ago
Right. So I civilly answer allegations that uber employees are somehow unethical or complicit in harassment or unethical behavior, and the perpetrators of this libel are safe, and I'm the one that's banned. Got it. You may not agree with what I wrote but I stand by everything I wrote as being respectful. Except to Mike Isaac who has an agenda against Uber with his reporting. Besides that, can you point to a single comment that was "uncivil"?
- dang 9y ago
  Yes, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14355444 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14355444 was uncivil and we warned you about it. In my experience, users that continue to make personal attacks after we ask them not to don't have much desire to use HN as intended (which involves, among other things, being respectful to others). If we've misassessed that in your case, it should be easy enough to clear up. I explained how upthread.
  - employee8001 9y ago
    Everything I wrote was civil, even the one about the slave. I didn't accuse them of anything it's just your narrowmindedness. I even had defenders on that thread. Time for a reality check, Dan. To call my responses to Uber threads as "flame wars" is a joke. I was giving my insider view on things every single time, in the face of wildly ridiculous statements. If those constitute "flame wars" then your "power" has gone to your head. And, uh, no, I won't be begging for an unban, that is preposterous. I was the only one giving civil and informative posts about inside Uber but I guess since anyone defending Uber is "flaming", then enjoy your echo chamber of Uber hate and misinformation.
PeCaN 9y ago
Reposting the deleted comment for people who don't have showdead on: > Right. So I civilly answer allegations that uber employees are somehow unethical or complicit in harassment or unethical behavior, and the perpetrators of this libel are safe, and I'm the one that's banned. Got it. > You may not agree with what I wrote but I stand by everything I wrote as being respectful. Except to Mike Isaac who has an agenda against Uber with his reporting. Besides that, can you point to a single comment that was "uncivil"? Reposting because frankly, there hasn't been anything uncivil. Just dang's agenda, as usual.
- dang 9y ago
  The account posted Also, it's my pleasure to say "fuck you, Mike Isaac" before editing that out when another user objected. That's obviously uncivil. But in this case the larger problem is that it's (more or less) a single-purpose account for getting into flamewars about Uber. That's not how this site is supposed to be used. Edit: We'd be happy to unban you as well if you'd simply promise to be civil in the future. One of the tentacles of my "agenda" is personally unkilling your high-quality technical comments so HN readers can enjoy them. It would be nice if we could just publish them in the first place.
  - rogerdonaldson 9y ago
    "But in this case the larger problem is that it's (more or less) a single-purpose account for getting into flamewars about Uber. That's not how this site is supposed to be used." So a person cannot give opinion in a civil way, and highlight information which was not known to others? It is "mandatory" to talk about multiple topics at HN? How do you define "flamewars"? Just giving your opinion about a topic, discussing, debating is flamewars? Then one could say the entire world of comments on HN is flamewars, since most comments discuss and debate topics. I believe arguing your opinion civilly, giving reasons etc, should be okay, regardless of whether you talk of only one topic -- or have a particular opinion on one side of the debate. Most users of the site typically have some view which falls on one side on any debate. But they defend it and give their reasons civilly. Thats the whole point, isnt it? I have read employee8000's posts and they all seem civil. Except for the one which was changed. But that particular comment was wrong, his other comments on this thread are very civil IMHO.