5 ms·

Edit: very interesting that this post is getting downvoted. I didn't even say anything controversial, just that banning people is bad. Exactly the danger we fac

by cheez 7y ago

Edit: very interesting that this post is getting downvoted. I didn't even say anything controversial, just that banning people is bad. Exactly the danger we face online, which will eventually get into broader society. I got banned on a platform for saying a public figure was physically attractive to me. Prior to that, I had engaged in a perfectly factual discussion about certain statistics that were in favor of a particular political position. There is no doubt in my mind that I was flagged for having a political position (to clarify: I didn't actually have the position, I was just posting statistics that supported that position). I like HN's approach to moderation. You don't ban the person unless they are really unreasonable. You flag the comment, disappear it from the thread and tell them to behave. I also like Gab's approach which is: if it's not illegal and you don't like it, then just block them from your feed. The wholesale banning of people for single statements that are generally taken out of context is emblematic of cancel culture and it isn't surprising to me that "hacker news" is more nuanced and understands that people are not one statement or one act.

erikpukinskis 7y ago
You can treat it like an “emblem of cancel culture” and if you’re right. It’s also an emblem for “people doing things other people don’t like and getting ditched for it” but which emblem you choose to see is up to you. That’s kind of the power and the weakness of emblems.
- irrational 7y ago
  I see it as emblematic of weak people who don't want to ever be exposed to anything disagreeable. Why can't the whole world be sunshine and unicorns?
- jerf 7y ago
  There is, I think, a fairly sharp line between you deciding you don't want to interact with someone in some particular forum, and someone else deciding you can't interact with someone. That line is not the line between "good" and "bad", necessarily. I'm just saying it's a relevant difference that shouldn't be blurred away.
- cheez 7y ago
  I'm sorry but I don't see any dichotomy in the two situations you've described. Cancel culture is literally people getting ditched because some people didn't like what some people did. That is, sticks and stones may break my bones but words are terrorism.
  - erikpukinskis 7y ago
    I didn’t claim a dichotomy I said they’re both true.
wayoutthere 7y ago
Don’t kid yourself — moderation is done with an editorial goal in mind, and HN is no different. There are plenty of topics about which the mods will shut down discussion. It’s just that HN’s moderation is more consistent and less emotional/political than your average subreddit.
- cheez 7y ago
  That wasn't my point. Editorializing is fine, what is problematic is outright banning.
PhasmaFelis 7y ago
> I like HN's approach to moderation. You don't ban the person unless they are really unreasonable. You flag the comment, disappear it from the thread and tell them to behave. That does happen, but HN also silently rate-limits and downrates comments for people that have been flagged as troublemakers by the mods. I'm currently rate-limited on HN to no more than five comments in a period of, I think, several hours. Trying to post more often produces a cryptic error message that I honestly thought was a bug. I eventually messaged the mods and was told that I must have done something disruptive (they couldn't tell me what) and they'd restore my privileges if I'd promise to stop doing that (which I can't do in good conscience without knowing what "it" was). I received no warning before this began. They said the obfuscation was necessary because, if I were a troll or a spammer, I'd just create a new account or three if I realized I was being restricted. I don't claim to be a perfect commenter. I know I've let emotion get the better of me on occasion, and it's fair to want to rein that in. But I think it's clear from my history that I'm posting in good faith, at the very least. Treating me like a malicious abuser benefits no one.
- cheez 7y ago
  Interesting. I guess I haven't yet gone against the opinions of the moderators so I haven't yet faced this problem. I guess gab is the way to go. Block others from your view if you disagree, not from the platform.
- teddyh 7y ago
  I am, I have come to believe, in the exact same situation as you, except that I have never contacted the moderators. My account is even almost exactly the same age as your account. It’s very disheartening to hear that contacting the moderators, which I have considered doing, will apparently accomplish nothing.
  - PhasmaFelis 7y ago
    It's worth a try, anyway. You might get a different mod with a different response, or you might be okay with making a non-specific promise to behave better. (The error I get is "You're posting too fast. Please slow down. Thanks.", if that sounds familiar.)

by cheez 7y ago

erikpukinskis 7y ago

You can treat it like an “emblem of cancel culture” and if you’re right. It’s also an emblem for “people doing things other people don’t like and getting ditched for it” but which emblem you choose to see is up to you. That’s kind of the power and the weakness of emblems.

irrational 7y ago
I see it as emblematic of weak people who don't want to ever be exposed to anything disagreeable. Why can't the whole world be sunshine and unicorns?
jerf 7y ago
There is, I think, a fairly sharp line between you deciding you don't want to interact with someone in some particular forum, and someone else deciding you can't interact with someone. That line is not the line between "good" and "bad", necessarily. I'm just saying it's a relevant difference that shouldn't be blurred away.
cheez 7y ago
I'm sorry but I don't see any dichotomy in the two situations you've described. Cancel culture is literally people getting ditched because some people didn't like what some people did. That is, sticks and stones may break my bones but words are terrorism.
- erikpukinskis 7y ago
  I didn’t claim a dichotomy I said they’re both true.

wayoutthere 7y ago

Don’t kid yourself — moderation is done with an editorial goal in mind, and HN is no different. There are plenty of topics about which the mods will shut down discussion. It’s just that HN’s moderation is more consistent and less emotional/political than your average subreddit.

cheez 7y ago
That wasn't my point. Editorializing is fine, what is problematic is outright banning.

PhasmaFelis 7y ago

> I like HN's approach to moderation. You don't ban the person unless they are really unreasonable. You flag the comment, disappear it from the thread and tell them to behave. That does happen, but HN also silently rate-limits and downrates comments for people that have been flagged as troublemakers by the mods. I'm currently rate-limited on HN to no more than five comments in a period of, I think, several hours. Trying to post more often produces a cryptic error message that I honestly thought was a bug. I eventually messaged the mods and was told that I must have done something disruptive (they couldn't tell me what) and they'd restore my privileges if I'd promise to stop doing that (which I can't do in good conscience without knowing what "it" was). I received no warning before this began. They said the obfuscation was necessary because, if I were a troll or a spammer, I'd just create a new account or three if I realized I was being restricted. I don't claim to be a perfect commenter. I know I've let emotion get the better of me on occasion, and it's fair to want to rein that in. But I think it's clear from my history that I'm posting in good faith, at the very least. Treating me like a malicious abuser benefits no one.

cheez 7y ago
Interesting. I guess I haven't yet gone against the opinions of the moderators so I haven't yet faced this problem. I guess gab is the way to go. Block others from your view if you disagree, not from the platform.
teddyh 7y ago
I am, I have come to believe, in the exact same situation as you, except that I have never contacted the moderators. My account is even almost exactly the same age as your account. It’s very disheartening to hear that contacting the moderators, which I have considered doing, will apparently accomplish nothing.
- PhasmaFelis 7y ago
  It's worth a try, anyway. You might get a different mod with a different response, or you might be okay with making a non-specific promise to behave better. (The error I get is "You're posting too fast. Please slow down. Thanks.", if that sounds familiar.)