5 ms·
Dan, the purpose of the relitigation is the same as it is everywhere else online -- to make the topic itself so toxic that it can't functionally be discussed (t
by zorpner 9y ago
Dan, the purpose of the relitigation is the same as it is everywhere else online -- to make the topic itself so toxic that it can't functionally be discussed (this works particularly well on HN because of the flamewar detection).
The way out is through. Acknowledge, recognize, and do something about the pervasive misogyny and bigotry that appears here every time topics like this are brought up.
- tptacek 9y agoI would word this differently but I think this is fundamentally correct. What we have now isn't quite as bad as it would be if HN were unmoderated, but our current policy concedes a hecklers veto on stuff like this.
- sillysaurus3 9y agoWhat's to be done? They ban people where bans are deserved. Almost every comment that's off-topic has been flagkilled. The system seems to be working pretty well. The comments are unpleasant for the ~8 or so minutes they're active, but they go away swiftly. It's hard to imagine a solution other than pg's "all comments start dead and need a vouch to come alive" idea from several years ago. Reddit deals with this situation by locking threads entirely, which many people wish wasn't a feature. Do you have any other suggestions?
- kevinburke 9y agoCharging money for accounts seems to work pretty well.
- barry-cotter 9y agoYou mean like the heckler's veto that saw yummyfajitas leave? Because if you see a heckler's veto in the treatment of feminism here and I saw the death of hope for US politics in dang telling Stucchio to shut up about controversial topics the moderation team has a hard job.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- pvg 9y agoyummyfajitas leave? He did? Well, good riddance. He's a person who reveled in wrapping overt sexism and racism in a cocoon of what can only very generously called 'scientism'. 'This isn't bigoted, you're just not following my axiomatic logic/fearless inquiry/bayesian maths' is a trope that even the most charitable moderator eventually catches on to.
- beaconstudios 9y agothat seems like a pretty unfortunate way of viewing what should be discussion on a discussion forum. I agree that there does tend to be a certain amount of misogyny that these discussions draw, but criticisms like "I don't think gender segregation is a good thing" don't fall into that category. For me, the problem seems to be that both sides want to shout and neither want to listen, but simply banning one side of the argument widens the valley further.