3 ms·

What would be new in the sense that matters? I think it was a natural flow of discussion: someone gives their perspective on an event, another person shares a r

What would be new in the sense that matters? I think it was a natural flow of discussion: someone gives their perspective on an event, another person shares a related scientific fact that supports that perspective. You aren't being clear, instead you are throwing out abstract words like flamewar, flamebait, groovy, etc. I'm not getting the memo. Please be specific, what exactly was wrong with that post? Do you have a standardized list of topics that you guys censor for fear of flamewars? Can you share that list with the community? If not, this seems arbitrary, illiberal, anti-intellectual, dictatorial.

dang 8y ago
Sorry, but this is the classic legalistic gambit of the troll. It's not hard to figure out the intended use of the site. If you don't want to use it that way, please don't post here and please don't make new accounts to get around the restrictions.
- comesee 8y ago
  What is legalistic gambit of the troll? Are you calling me a troll? Look at my history, does that bear out? Now you're telling me not to use the site? I'm sitting here taking my time trying to be as precise as possible with my thoughts. How can I make it any more clear I'm acting in good faith? I'm rapidly becoming more and more confused about this entire thread and neither you nor sctb have been specific, that is clear for anyone to see. Your refusal to be specific when I've directly asked you to clarify is especially worrisome. Please really try to empathize with me here, how would you feel if you were in my position? I'm trying to engage honestly here.
- v_lisivka 8y ago
  Dang, you are not listening to user problems. I was moderator for more than 10 years on linux.org.ua and nobody told me that I was bad moderator. I also regular user on other forums/sites, so I have view on the problem from both sides. HN is badly moderated. However, most problems with moderation/flames/etc., can be fixed using technology or by writing better rules. If you are interesting in fixing of HN problems, contact me: vlisivka@gmail.com .
  - dang 8y ago
    Happy to listen to user opinions and do so every day, but when someone has a history of not following the site rules, as you do, their complaints become less compelling. This can be fixed by reading https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the spirit of this site to heart, and using at as intended from now on.
    - comesee 8y ago
      "taking the spirit of the site to heart, and using the site as intended" is abstract and its interpretation is subject to your whims. It doesn't actually mean anything for anyone else, no matter how many times it's repeated, no matter how many people nod in agreement. Just because something is written down doesn't make it a sufficiently specific, objective, and fair law. You want to talk about a legalistic gambit, well how about a pseudo law that essentially gives you mileage to moderate the site however you see fit? That's what I'm seeing here by your refusal to be specific and you chanting "spirit of the site." The situation as I see it is that nearly all conformity to your laws is incidental, not intentional. Those who are unlucky enough to not naturally conform to your arbitrary standards aren't given the proper tools to conform (as evidenced here), and simply have to hope that they won't violate the "spirit of the site" again (the best way being through self-censorship). This site claims to value intellectual curiosity but it seems the values of the site are off limits to curiosity.
    - v_lisivka 8y ago
      Well, I agree that I'm not the best HN user, but I'm not a young inexperienced person: I survived few assassinations, and lost few friends, which were not so lucky. I also quite busy with my work, my startup, education, science, history, politics, and some other topic, so I will not post something just to insult somebody. IMHO, HN can be improved to automatically filter out discussions. Imagine, we have a magic system, which automagically labeled all comments as a) on topic or not on topic b) improvement, critics, opinion, correction, controversy, alternative view, support, trolling, joke, fun, suggestion, discussion, flame, etc. c) history, politics, physics, mathematics, engineering, computer science, programming, etc. Then we can just place some labels on top of each submission with number of comments for that label. By default, only on-topic comments with good labels should be enabled. But user should be free to enable other topics as well. Now, we need to imagine how to implement such automagic labeling system with minimum of up-keeping cost. IMHO, first we should allow user to label his comments himself. If comment is labeled properly, then user will not punished. If comment labeled incorrectly, then other users can vote to change label with cumulative score (if user has higher rating, his vote worth more), and user will be automatically punished if label changed from good to bad. On-topic/off-topic should be implemented as checkbox on submit form. Other labels can be implemented as hashtags or collapsible boxes. Users should be able to add or remove labels to other posts, if necessary, when they have high enough rating for such action and label. Users should be able to chose which labels they want or don't want to see with reasonable defaults. IMHO, it's much better to be constructive ans ask user to label his post as "#politics #flame" instead of forbidding him to post. Example: A post title. yyyy.mm.dd hh:mm on-topic(12) off-topic(21) vlisivka x hours ago | off-topic(up dn) #hn-site #suggestion (add label) I have a suggestion about how to improve HN.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

dang 8y ago

Sorry, but this is the classic legalistic gambit of the troll. It's not hard to figure out the intended use of the site. If you don't want to use it that way, please don't post here and please don't make new accounts to get around the restrictions.

comesee 8y ago
What is legalistic gambit of the troll? Are you calling me a troll? Look at my history, does that bear out? Now you're telling me not to use the site? I'm sitting here taking my time trying to be as precise as possible with my thoughts. How can I make it any more clear I'm acting in good faith? I'm rapidly becoming more and more confused about this entire thread and neither you nor sctb have been specific, that is clear for anyone to see. Your refusal to be specific when I've directly asked you to clarify is especially worrisome. Please really try to empathize with me here, how would you feel if you were in my position? I'm trying to engage honestly here.
v_lisivka 8y ago
Dang, you are not listening to user problems. I was moderator for more than 10 years on linux.org.ua and nobody told me that I was bad moderator. I also regular user on other forums/sites, so I have view on the problem from both sides. HN is badly moderated. However, most problems with moderation/flames/etc., can be fixed using technology or by writing better rules. If you are interesting in fixing of HN problems, contact me: vlisivka@gmail.com .
- dang 8y ago
  Happy to listen to user opinions and do so every day, but when someone has a history of not following the site rules, as you do, their complaints become less compelling. This can be fixed by reading https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the spirit of this site to heart, and using at as intended from now on.
  - comesee 8y ago
    "taking the spirit of the site to heart, and using the site as intended" is abstract and its interpretation is subject to your whims. It doesn't actually mean anything for anyone else, no matter how many times it's repeated, no matter how many people nod in agreement. Just because something is written down doesn't make it a sufficiently specific, objective, and fair law. You want to talk about a legalistic gambit, well how about a pseudo law that essentially gives you mileage to moderate the site however you see fit? That's what I'm seeing here by your refusal to be specific and you chanting "spirit of the site." The situation as I see it is that nearly all conformity to your laws is incidental, not intentional. Those who are unlucky enough to not naturally conform to your arbitrary standards aren't given the proper tools to conform (as evidenced here), and simply have to hope that they won't violate the "spirit of the site" again (the best way being through self-censorship). This site claims to value intellectual curiosity but it seems the values of the site are off limits to curiosity.
  - v_lisivka 8y ago
    Well, I agree that I'm not the best HN user, but I'm not a young inexperienced person: I survived few assassinations, and lost few friends, which were not so lucky. I also quite busy with my work, my startup, education, science, history, politics, and some other topic, so I will not post something just to insult somebody. IMHO, HN can be improved to automatically filter out discussions. Imagine, we have a magic system, which automagically labeled all comments as a) on topic or not on topic b) improvement, critics, opinion, correction, controversy, alternative view, support, trolling, joke, fun, suggestion, discussion, flame, etc. c) history, politics, physics, mathematics, engineering, computer science, programming, etc. Then we can just place some labels on top of each submission with number of comments for that label. By default, only on-topic comments with good labels should be enabled. But user should be free to enable other topics as well. Now, we need to imagine how to implement such automagic labeling system with minimum of up-keeping cost. IMHO, first we should allow user to label his comments himself. If comment is labeled properly, then user will not punished. If comment labeled incorrectly, then other users can vote to change label with cumulative score (if user has higher rating, his vote worth more), and user will be automatically punished if label changed from good to bad. On-topic/off-topic should be implemented as checkbox on submit form. Other labels can be implemented as hashtags or collapsible boxes. Users should be able to add or remove labels to other posts, if necessary, when they have high enough rating for such action and label. Users should be able to chose which labels they want or don't want to see with reasonable defaults. IMHO, it's much better to be constructive ans ask user to label his post as "#politics #flame" instead of forbidding him to post. Example: A post title. yyyy.mm.dd hh:mm on-topic(12) off-topic(21) vlisivka x hours ago | off-topic(up dn) #hn-site #suggestion (add label) I have a suggestion about how to improve HN.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]