8 ms·
I think the relevant guideline puts it well: > Comments should get more civil and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.
by sctb 8y ago
I think the relevant guideline puts it well:
> Comments should get more civil and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.
- pvg 8y agoThe inadequacy of this guideline and couching most moderation along its lines is why the problem and 'dynamics' as tptacek puts it, exist in the first place. The site selects for and breeds civil, substantive racists and misogynists (along with the hyper-sensitized responses) like a hospital breeds antibiotic-resistant superbugs.
- Anderkent 8y agoI can see selects for, but breeds seems a stretch. Unless you mean breeds civility within racists and misogynists, which seems beneficial?
- pvg 8y agoYes, mostly the second thing. It's the opposite of beneficial - because the guidelines say 'don't be a meanie/obvious blowhard' and most people who get called out for anything are called out for something along those lines, bigots who adapt to these can and sometimes do last on the site for years. HN's mods put in a great deal of effort in and are surprisingly successful at containing the far more basic and common human impulse to be a jerk to strangers online. They have rules, they enforce them, they publicly shame rulebreakers, etc. You are explicitly not allowed to be an asshat on HN and everyone knows it. The place would be better if 'don't be a bigot' got the same treatment. All caps users and transgressors against HN's fundamentalist quotation marks cult† are exposed to more public opprobrium than your typical "human biodiversity" sea lion. †This bit is a dumb[1] joke[2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumb [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke