8 ms·

>I respect your country. Nevertheless this violates HN's rules and if you do it again we will ban you. Genuinely asking, which rules? Sorry i need to clarify

by 0xFFC 9y ago

>I respect your country. Nevertheless this violates HN's rules and if you do it again we will ban you. Genuinely asking, which rules? Sorry i need to clarify what I meant by country. I don't respect flags and idea. So we can both agree i am not nationalist. I don't respect the idea of iran or USA or etc. I respect humanity. By country what I meant was the people. Out people (take for example students m) are under fierce attack of right wing mentality as terrorist when there is literally 0 terroric attack related to iran happen in USA in any last 20 years(50 years?). Yet i cannot visa and i am waiting for almost 1 year even considering i have full scholarship from UIC. But Suadi Arabia which literally where every terroristic attack rooted from in last 20 year is not in the ban list. So , genuinely asking. I am nationalist, or i am trying to present a logical question?

dang 9y ago
These rules: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. Especially the rules regarding civility, politics, and intellectual curiosity, which are the most important ones. Nationalistic flamewar—which you started—is the essence of all that we don't want here, regardless of how well-intentioned you are. Life-and-death questions of national identity are far stronger and more important than the things that gratify intellectual curiosity. For that reason, we all (and you in particular) need to bracket those stronger topics and stronger emotions when commenting here. To do anything else is to give up on having a site dedicated to intellectual curiosity at all, and given that that's the raison d'etre of Hacker News, we can't allow that. It's time for you to stop commenting now and really take this in.
- 0xFFC 9y ago
  Okay, but I really wanted to show a broader issue which targeted us (Iranian students who have trouble getting visa from USA, when some terrorist can do). And remember Mirzakhani was in a position exactly like myself in one day. She was from iran, finished her bachelor and was applying to USA universities. I bet u she had trouble getting visas because of what we discussed already. Anyway in respect to HN and to show my good intention i am not going to comment in this topic any further, thank u and RIP Mirzakhani.
  - prance 9y ago
    Thank you for giving your perspective on this, I for one appreciate it. I also don't see how you've violated the guidelines (which btw. are called "guidelines" and not "rules", but that's another issue). Where you mentioned politics, you were merely stating facts or personal experience.
- nkoren 9y ago
  I'm very disturbed by your comments. 0xFFC has not been uncivil, nationalistic, or even particularly political. He was merely pointing out that Maryam was representative of a society that is more diverse and tolerant than many people imagine -- an issue that she herself cared about and occasionally addressed. That is fair and on-topic social statement; his only nod to politics was the words "despite our theocratic regime", which I'd also add is a perfectly fair comment. And yet you slap him down and not davidf18, whose response is, in fact, overtly nationalistic and entirely off-topic. I would kindly ask you to rethink how you moderate this.
  - dang 9y ago
    > And yet you slap him down and not davidf18, whose response is, in fact On the contrary I scolded that user not once but twice, and more harshly, in accordance with the comments themselves. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14776948 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14776948 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14776963 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14776963 (and later banned him: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14778558 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14778558) Even if I hadn't, though, it's entirely bogus to conclude that moderation responding to one commenter means implicitly endorsing an opposing commenter.
- chegra 9y ago
  I have to agree with the others who commented and say I don't think 0xFFC violate the spirit of the rule. We are better off for his comments.
- obmelvin 9y ago
  I would like to add that I also don't see anything wrong with his posts. It is a humanizing comment about the people of a country
- wfunction 9y ago
  dang, this is literally the first time I recall ever seeing a mod respond like this, and I've seen some pretty off-topic comments before. The comment was pretty darn civil, we've had political discussions all the time, and you know better than I do that not every well-received comment in HN sparks "intellectual curiosity". Furthermore, for the life of me I don't see the "flamewar" that was started here. It seems more like you started the flames by threatening an immediate ban. So I'm a little shocked to see you reply like this. You could've just said the comment is off-topic and deleted it quietly, but to suddenly call it a nationalistic flamewar... I don't see how you expect people to take that.
  - sixQuarks 9y ago
    I agree
  - dang 9y ago
    "Threatening an immediate ban" is not accurate. I led with https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14776923 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14776923. The commenter responded with "I wanted to started this flamewar", which they subsequently edited to say "didn't wanted" (presumably this was a language misfire). Moderation replies can indeed look pretty bad when the comments to which they're replying have been edited to say the opposite of what they originally said! When I showed up the thread was already full of angry arguments about Hezbollah and 9/11. Perhaps you haven't seen those comments? Some of them are probably flagged by now. I scolded all the users who were doing this and ended up banning the worst couple of offenders, so there shouldn't be any question of favoritism here. And yes, obviously the original comment wasn't nearly as toxic as the ones that followed. What you guys seem to be missing is that the comment that sparks a flamewar is responsible for what it sparked. It's not as if these dynamics aren't well understood and predictable. The provocation wasn't intentional (that's why I led with saying "I'm sure you meant well"), but it was negligent, and commenters here—all of us—need to learn not to do that. I've had to learn this myself, it took me a long time, and I haven't mastered it yet. You guys are right about one thing, though: I haven't done a good job of explaining how I intervened in the thread, to judge by how much pushback my comments received. When that happens, I take it as a sign of something wrong in my approach. In this case the reason is that I was running out the door on my way to a workshop, and moderation in haste is never a good idea. Now I'm running back to the same event (late!) so my last half-dozen comments may not be much better, but I hope I've at least given more background explanation.
- srean 9y ago
  Dang I respect your work a whole lot and appreciate all that you put in to keep HN a place i like coming back to. But the comment above was totally unwarranted and uncalled for in my opinion. I flagged it (of course, just as a token symbolism). Promoting self censorship just because a topic is unpopular is not a theme that I associate HN with. Flame war aside I am happy that some sane discussion and information around the topic came to light because of the comment that started this. Not only that in the context of story and the current time I did not find it off topic at all.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

by 0xFFC 9y ago

dang 9y ago

These rules: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. Especially the rules regarding civility, politics, and intellectual curiosity, which are the most important ones. Nationalistic flamewar—which you started—is the essence of all that we don't want here, regardless of how well-intentioned you are. Life-and-death questions of national identity are far stronger and more important than the things that gratify intellectual curiosity. For that reason, we all (and you in particular) need to bracket those stronger topics and stronger emotions when commenting here. To do anything else is to give up on having a site dedicated to intellectual curiosity at all, and given that that's the raison d'etre of Hacker News, we can't allow that. It's time for you to stop commenting now and really take this in.

0xFFC 9y ago
Okay, but I really wanted to show a broader issue which targeted us (Iranian students who have trouble getting visa from USA, when some terrorist can do). And remember Mirzakhani was in a position exactly like myself in one day. She was from iran, finished her bachelor and was applying to USA universities. I bet u she had trouble getting visas because of what we discussed already. Anyway in respect to HN and to show my good intention i am not going to comment in this topic any further, thank u and RIP Mirzakhani.
- prance 9y ago
  Thank you for giving your perspective on this, I for one appreciate it. I also don't see how you've violated the guidelines (which btw. are called "guidelines" and not "rules", but that's another issue). Where you mentioned politics, you were merely stating facts or personal experience.
nkoren 9y ago
I'm very disturbed by your comments. 0xFFC has not been uncivil, nationalistic, or even particularly political. He was merely pointing out that Maryam was representative of a society that is more diverse and tolerant than many people imagine -- an issue that she herself cared about and occasionally addressed. That is fair and on-topic social statement; his only nod to politics was the words "despite our theocratic regime", which I'd also add is a perfectly fair comment. And yet you slap him down and not davidf18, whose response is, in fact, overtly nationalistic and entirely off-topic. I would kindly ask you to rethink how you moderate this.
- dang 9y ago
  > And yet you slap him down and not davidf18, whose response is, in fact On the contrary I scolded that user not once but twice, and more harshly, in accordance with the comments themselves. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14776948 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14776948 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14776963 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14776963 (and later banned him: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14778558 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14778558) Even if I hadn't, though, it's entirely bogus to conclude that moderation responding to one commenter means implicitly endorsing an opposing commenter.
chegra 9y ago
I have to agree with the others who commented and say I don't think 0xFFC violate the spirit of the rule. We are better off for his comments.
obmelvin 9y ago
I would like to add that I also don't see anything wrong with his posts. It is a humanizing comment about the people of a country
wfunction 9y ago
dang, this is literally the first time I recall ever seeing a mod respond like this, and I've seen some pretty off-topic comments before. The comment was pretty darn civil, we've had political discussions all the time, and you know better than I do that not every well-received comment in HN sparks "intellectual curiosity". Furthermore, for the life of me I don't see the "flamewar" that was started here. It seems more like you started the flames by threatening an immediate ban. So I'm a little shocked to see you reply like this. You could've just said the comment is off-topic and deleted it quietly, but to suddenly call it a nationalistic flamewar... I don't see how you expect people to take that.
- sixQuarks 9y ago
  I agree
- dang 9y ago
  "Threatening an immediate ban" is not accurate. I led with https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14776923 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14776923. The commenter responded with "I wanted to started this flamewar", which they subsequently edited to say "didn't wanted" (presumably this was a language misfire). Moderation replies can indeed look pretty bad when the comments to which they're replying have been edited to say the opposite of what they originally said! When I showed up the thread was already full of angry arguments about Hezbollah and 9/11. Perhaps you haven't seen those comments? Some of them are probably flagged by now. I scolded all the users who were doing this and ended up banning the worst couple of offenders, so there shouldn't be any question of favoritism here. And yes, obviously the original comment wasn't nearly as toxic as the ones that followed. What you guys seem to be missing is that the comment that sparks a flamewar is responsible for what it sparked. It's not as if these dynamics aren't well understood and predictable. The provocation wasn't intentional (that's why I led with saying "I'm sure you meant well"), but it was negligent, and commenters here—all of us—need to learn not to do that. I've had to learn this myself, it took me a long time, and I haven't mastered it yet. You guys are right about one thing, though: I haven't done a good job of explaining how I intervened in the thread, to judge by how much pushback my comments received. When that happens, I take it as a sign of something wrong in my approach. In this case the reason is that I was running out the door on my way to a workshop, and moderation in haste is never a good idea. Now I'm running back to the same event (late!) so my last half-dozen comments may not be much better, but I hope I've at least given more background explanation.
srean 9y ago
Dang I respect your work a whole lot and appreciate all that you put in to keep HN a place i like coming back to. But the comment above was totally unwarranted and uncalled for in my opinion. I flagged it (of course, just as a token symbolism). Promoting self censorship just because a topic is unpopular is not a theme that I associate HN with. Flame war aside I am happy that some sane discussion and information around the topic came to light because of the comment that started this. Not only that in the context of story and the current time I did not find it off topic at all.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]