4 ms·
It's seems more likely that, like me, they flag them because they clearly fall into the Off-Topic category of the HN guidelines.
by jasonkostempski 9y ago
It's seems more likely that, like me, they flag them because they clearly fall into the Off-Topic category of the HN guidelines.
- ceejayoz 9y agoWere they off-topic in Uber's case? I'm not sure how something that took down Travis Kalanick isn't relevant on HN.
- weberc2 9y agoI imagine people are more likely to flag a boring off-topic story than an interesting off-topic story. "interesting" probably being some function of relevance to the reader.
- jasonkostempski 9y agoYes. Some guy involved in scandal at company that provides a service that happens to be done through a computer is not "anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity". It at least falls under the categories of: crime that is not evidence of some interesting new phenomenon; maybe pratfalls; and, considering I saw it on The Today Show before HN, it's definitely covered on TV News. That's 3 of 7 stated off-topic categories. I'm not usually a stickler for these kinds of rules but it has gotten to be too much as of late. I understand it comes in waves and usually goes away, but when the wave hits, the only tool we have to fight it is the "flag". The topics don't go unnoticed, I'm sure HN isn't the only forum most people here visit. I occasionally partake in the conversations around this kind of story (not as a guideline Nazi), usually on Reddit, where it's expected. The most I'm ever going to do about problems like this are to not be part of and discourage behavior like it in areas of my life I have actual control over, so I don't want to be angered hourly by stories I can't or won't do anything about directly. The guidelines seem to imply this site is supposed to be a place that aligns with that and, for the most part, it does, except when it doesn't, and that is what I think "flag" is for.