3 ms·

This was flagged because I called out the mods on their censorship: --- Let's see if HN censors this like they did with the last time this Scientific Journal

This was flagged because I called out the mods on their censorship: --- Let's see if HN censors this like they did with the last time this Scientific Journal article was submitted. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20417085 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20417085 --- Edit: right on cue. The HN censors are getting quicker. Maybe they can do one of the "machine learning" algorithms to make censorship more efficient. This was the censored article. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.00165.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.00165.pdf --- Edit: Ooh, slick. HN now uncensored the article. Don't worry though, it's archived in it's censored state. https://archive.fo/5PeJe https://archive.fo/5PeJe

dang 7y ago
Did you not see my reply to your email? Users flagged that post. Moderators didn't touch it or even see it. It looks like you have been using HN exclusively to do battle about this issue. That's against the guidelines, and we ban accounts that do it, regardless of what you're battling for. We have to, because battle is incompatible with curiosity and this site exists for curiosity. Please stop doing this—we've already had to warn you more than once. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- briantakita 7y ago
  Everybody promotes their point of view. You are obviously biased against my point of view. My agenda is to have rational discussions. There is nothing wrong with discussing a scientific paper & discussing how it is obviously flagged despite receiving enough votes to make it to the front page two times. It's only "an agenda" because we live in an environment where people flag scientific papers due to their "agenda". Everybody has "agendas", especially many of those who downvote & those who flag posts. Why don't you crack down on their "agenda"? You can warn me however you wish. I'm not scared of you. And I don't believe you. You obviously favor the people that you agree with. You are not this "impartial moderator" that you make yourself out to be. It's all in the words that you use. You also have an "agenda". We are humans. And FYI, I read my email after I wrote that comment. I wrote you back a response. --- I'm "posting too fast" so I'm responding to your response here... That is complete BS because if my views were the opposite, I would follow the cultural norms, think as I'm told by authority, & not agree with posts that got flagged. I would be doing the flagging because I would be narrow-minded & unable to read a scientific paper that goes against my views. The flagging & downvoting is used aggressively here to promote obvious agendas & heterodoxy. It's as if a group of sports fan were allowed to talk smack about other teams & be allowed to flag & downvote another team's fans, even if the other teams' fans are otherwise civil & follow protocol. I see a lot of sh*t talking going a certain way. While they can dogpile anybody who disagrees with them "to avoid flame wars", it's not a civil environment. That's ok, I can handle it. However, it creates a certain culture here. There's some good articles, but the conversation tends to be narrow-minded & overbearing on certain topics.
  - dang 7y ago
    Everyone who is passionate on a topic thinks the mods are biased against their view. This is a mechanical perception that reflects the passion of the perceiver. For sports fans, it always feels like the refs are against their team too. I don't want to scare you, just persuade you to use HN as intended. This site doesn't exist for flamewars. The moderation would be just the same if your view were the opposite.

dang 7y ago

Did you not see my reply to your email? Users flagged that post. Moderators didn't touch it or even see it. It looks like you have been using HN exclusively to do battle about this issue. That's against the guidelines, and we ban accounts that do it, regardless of what you're battling for. We have to, because battle is incompatible with curiosity and this site exists for curiosity. Please stop doing this—we've already had to warn you more than once. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

briantakita 7y ago
Everybody promotes their point of view. You are obviously biased against my point of view. My agenda is to have rational discussions. There is nothing wrong with discussing a scientific paper & discussing how it is obviously flagged despite receiving enough votes to make it to the front page two times. It's only "an agenda" because we live in an environment where people flag scientific papers due to their "agenda". Everybody has "agendas", especially many of those who downvote & those who flag posts. Why don't you crack down on their "agenda"? You can warn me however you wish. I'm not scared of you. And I don't believe you. You obviously favor the people that you agree with. You are not this "impartial moderator" that you make yourself out to be. It's all in the words that you use. You also have an "agenda". We are humans. And FYI, I read my email after I wrote that comment. I wrote you back a response. --- I'm "posting too fast" so I'm responding to your response here... That is complete BS because if my views were the opposite, I would follow the cultural norms, think as I'm told by authority, & not agree with posts that got flagged. I would be doing the flagging because I would be narrow-minded & unable to read a scientific paper that goes against my views. The flagging & downvoting is used aggressively here to promote obvious agendas & heterodoxy. It's as if a group of sports fan were allowed to talk smack about other teams & be allowed to flag & downvote another team's fans, even if the other teams' fans are otherwise civil & follow protocol. I see a lot of sh*t talking going a certain way. While they can dogpile anybody who disagrees with them "to avoid flame wars", it's not a civil environment. That's ok, I can handle it. However, it creates a certain culture here. There's some good articles, but the conversation tends to be narrow-minded & overbearing on certain topics.
- dang 7y ago
  Everyone who is passionate on a topic thinks the mods are biased against their view. This is a mechanical perception that reflects the passion of the perceiver. For sports fans, it always feels like the refs are against their team too. I don't want to scare you, just persuade you to use HN as intended. This site doesn't exist for flamewars. The moderation would be just the same if your view were the opposite.