6 ms·

I have showdead turned on and always read the dead comments. Sometimes it's a mystery why they're dead (user isn't banned, not seemingly rude or controversial)

I have showdead turned on and always read the dead comments. Sometimes it's a mystery why they're dead (user isn't banned, not seemingly rude or controversial) and I always think it might have been an accidental swarm of down-voting mis-clicks by just enough random users.

dang 7y ago
Why don't you vouch for them? Vouching is a way for users to rescue [dead] comments that shouldn't be [dead]. Click on the timestamp to go to its page, then click 'vouch' at the top. (There's a small karma threshold for such links to appear.) Comments can be [dead] for many reasons, including software (which doesn't get everything right) or the account being banned (which doesn't mean that every post is bad—indeed, some users start posting good comments only once we've banned them). So there are plenty of good comments that need to be rescued, which is why we introduced vouching in the first place. It works well when users use it.
- NeedMoreTea 7y ago
  Quick question if I can. Have I triggered some evil spammer bit in the system somehow, as I haven't been able to vouch for a while - it no longer rescues anything. Or did it change to need more than one vote? Thanks.
  - dang 7y ago
    Yes, you vouched for too many comments that break the site guidelines, such as personal attacks and flamewars. When an account does that, we eventually notice and take vouching rights away. The feature is for rescuing good comments that are in the spirit of the site, not comments that violate it. We're always happy to restore privileges if people give us reason to believe that they've had a change of heart and want to use HN as intended in the future.
    - NeedMoreTea 7y ago
      Well my first reaction to that is one of amazed disbelief. Personal attacks and flamewars are usually bleeding obvious, and equally easy to avoid. With it having been there a while, I can't think of any specific comments one way or another, but was and have always intended to use it to rescue (typically) a comment making a good point to the discussion, or the question I'd be interested in an answer to as well. So I can't imagine how I crossed whatever line. I generally agree wth the tone of moderation here, and degree of leeway usually given. I think my comment history would bear out in tone and style that I'm using as intended, and I don't recall ever having had a mod pick up any of my comments. :p I disagree with the odd rare one - this is hard to generalise without going away to dig for examples - usually where it seems to get a slap on the wrist for a reasonable, or historically accurate point within the flow of a discussion where the complaint of nationalistic or whatever seems a bit of a stretch. Case in point, the guy posting links that seemed to be reliably going on every climate related topic - I'd have said nowt for one or two, but had seen enough, like on every related post I'd read in a couple of days, that I thought it would have been missed by mods and worth a mention. Others trigger much sooner than I. Make of that as you will. :)
      - tropo 7y ago
        Maybe you and dang have a different ability to recognize sarcasm. Sometimes this is really difficult. Looking at comment history can often help you figure out if something is sarcasm or not. There can also be words that some people find offensive. Not everybody agrees on the words that qualify.
        NeedMoreTea 7y ago
        That's also possible, being British I had sarcasm and detection built in at birth. We usually just call it chatting as most conversations get liberally laced with it here. :) Decades on the net has been an interesting education that some, for some reason especially American, don't recognise sarcasm without the helpful /s. I learnt to pull my punches online on that score years ago. On the [vouch] front I'm not hugely bothered as it doesn't really detract from using HN, more surprised as I don't generally trigger moderator interest anywhere I've been since BBS days. I'm sure dang will respond in due course as to whether I rate forgiveness or not. Edit: I should add that I would think it highly unlikely I'd have resurrected comments heavy with sarcasm, I've been well aware for years it doesn't fly around here.
- Intermernet 7y ago
  Hey dang, thanks for the info. I always assumed I couldn't vouch as I didn't see an obvious "vouch" link next to dead comments. Now that I know I need to click on the timestamp I'll investigate this. I'm still not sure if I have enough karma to vouch, but I'll check it out. EDIT: just checked a few dead links. It seems I do have the ability to vouch. I'll try to use it responsibly!

dang 7y ago

Why don't you vouch for them? Vouching is a way for users to rescue [dead] comments that shouldn't be [dead]. Click on the timestamp to go to its page, then click 'vouch' at the top. (There's a small karma threshold for such links to appear.) Comments can be [dead] for many reasons, including software (which doesn't get everything right) or the account being banned (which doesn't mean that every post is bad—indeed, some users start posting good comments only once we've banned them). So there are plenty of good comments that need to be rescued, which is why we introduced vouching in the first place. It works well when users use it.

NeedMoreTea 7y ago
Quick question if I can. Have I triggered some evil spammer bit in the system somehow, as I haven't been able to vouch for a while - it no longer rescues anything. Or did it change to need more than one vote? Thanks.
- dang 7y ago
  Yes, you vouched for too many comments that break the site guidelines, such as personal attacks and flamewars. When an account does that, we eventually notice and take vouching rights away. The feature is for rescuing good comments that are in the spirit of the site, not comments that violate it. We're always happy to restore privileges if people give us reason to believe that they've had a change of heart and want to use HN as intended in the future.
  - NeedMoreTea 7y ago
    Well my first reaction to that is one of amazed disbelief. Personal attacks and flamewars are usually bleeding obvious, and equally easy to avoid. With it having been there a while, I can't think of any specific comments one way or another, but was and have always intended to use it to rescue (typically) a comment making a good point to the discussion, or the question I'd be interested in an answer to as well. So I can't imagine how I crossed whatever line. I generally agree wth the tone of moderation here, and degree of leeway usually given. I think my comment history would bear out in tone and style that I'm using as intended, and I don't recall ever having had a mod pick up any of my comments. :p I disagree with the odd rare one - this is hard to generalise without going away to dig for examples - usually where it seems to get a slap on the wrist for a reasonable, or historically accurate point within the flow of a discussion where the complaint of nationalistic or whatever seems a bit of a stretch. Case in point, the guy posting links that seemed to be reliably going on every climate related topic - I'd have said nowt for one or two, but had seen enough, like on every related post I'd read in a couple of days, that I thought it would have been missed by mods and worth a mention. Others trigger much sooner than I. Make of that as you will. :)
    - tropo 7y ago
      Maybe you and dang have a different ability to recognize sarcasm. Sometimes this is really difficult. Looking at comment history can often help you figure out if something is sarcasm or not. There can also be words that some people find offensive. Not everybody agrees on the words that qualify.
      - NeedMoreTea 7y ago
        That's also possible, being British I had sarcasm and detection built in at birth. We usually just call it chatting as most conversations get liberally laced with it here. :) Decades on the net has been an interesting education that some, for some reason especially American, don't recognise sarcasm without the helpful /s. I learnt to pull my punches online on that score years ago. On the [vouch] front I'm not hugely bothered as it doesn't really detract from using HN, more surprised as I don't generally trigger moderator interest anywhere I've been since BBS days. I'm sure dang will respond in due course as to whether I rate forgiveness or not. Edit: I should add that I would think it highly unlikely I'd have resurrected comments heavy with sarcasm, I've been well aware for years it doesn't fly around here.
Intermernet 7y ago
Hey dang, thanks for the info. I always assumed I couldn't vouch as I didn't see an obvious "vouch" link next to dead comments. Now that I know I need to click on the timestamp I'll investigate this. I'm still not sure if I have enough karma to vouch, but I'll check it out. EDIT: just checked a few dead links. It seems I do have the ability to vouch. I'll try to use it responsibly!