4 ms·

Thank you for taking the time to type out such detailed and thoughtful replies here and down thread. I sincerely appreciate your input and perspective. Obvious

by grecy 7y ago

Thank you for taking the time to type out such detailed and thoughtful replies here and down thread. I sincerely appreciate your input and perspective. Obviously you have infinitely more experience and insight than I do, and you have given me a lot to think about. I had never before realized that it is in fact me who is the toxic element in this community by singling out individuals and putting them on trial. I feel bad about it (as I should) and I will never do that again. Down thread you linked to [1], and I also appreciate your thoughtful and detailed explanation there. I agree with you that putting individuals on trial pitch-fork style is not a nice path to go down, though I can't help wonder if there isn't a "bigger picture" or anonymized way to demonstrate to the community (or just me) that the "shill" problem isn't really an issue on HN. Like you said I seem to have jumped to the conclusion that "paid government influencers" (for want of a better term) are at work on HN, and it feels like it will be a hard assumption to shake. I'm at a point in my life where I utterly distrust any media, and I have extended that to social media. I strongly believe that virtually everything we are given from media is only one perspective, and typically it's given to us that way to benefit the entity giving the media (financial or political power). I can only imagine how busy you are, so I feel bad adding to your stack. Would you have any interest in writing a blog post, or a "sticky" with numbers and and data that demonstrates how you know the shill problem on HN is minor? I'm thinking something along these lines [2] , though I'm sure you have way better ideas than I do. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19403358 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19403358 [2] https://twitter.com/AirMovingDevice/status/1181120601643073536?s=20 https://twitter.com/AirMovingDevice/status/11811206016430735...

dang 7y ago
Thanks for such a calm and kind reply. I've not gone easy on you and I know it sucks to get those sort of moderation comments. I hope you can trust that it's absolutely not personal and that my point was directed at the community, not you. I do need to write something more definitive about this, if only so I can link to it in the future instead of writing variations of the same comment over and over again, which is slowly driving me crazy. But I fear it won't convince anyone. Personal interactions, like the one we're having here, sometimes seem to move the needle—which btw goes a long way toward repairing the hopelessness I often feel about this issue. But I'm unsure how to effectively deliver this message to the community as a whole, or if that's even possible. My gut feeling about a statistical analysis is that it would probably be unsatisfying and stir up more objections than it settled. That tweet you linked seems to depend on much higher volume, 1000x if not more, compared to what we see on HN. That is, he's analyzing 5000 instances of a measurable kind of comment, of which HN probably wouldn't even get 5 over the same time period. Trying to analyze the HN corpus on these questions would be frustrating, because you'd be forced into semantic analysis right away and no one would agree whether you'd done it right. But I'm open to suggestions.

by grecy 7y ago

dang 7y ago

Thanks for such a calm and kind reply. I've not gone easy on you and I know it sucks to get those sort of moderation comments. I hope you can trust that it's absolutely not personal and that my point was directed at the community, not you. I do need to write something more definitive about this, if only so I can link to it in the future instead of writing variations of the same comment over and over again, which is slowly driving me crazy. But I fear it won't convince anyone. Personal interactions, like the one we're having here, sometimes seem to move the needle—which btw goes a long way toward repairing the hopelessness I often feel about this issue. But I'm unsure how to effectively deliver this message to the community as a whole, or if that's even possible. My gut feeling about a statistical analysis is that it would probably be unsatisfying and stir up more objections than it settled. That tweet you linked seems to depend on much higher volume, 1000x if not more, compared to what we see on HN. That is, he's analyzing 5000 instances of a measurable kind of comment, of which HN probably wouldn't even get 5 over the same time period. Trying to analyze the HN corpus on these questions would be frustrating, because you'd be forced into semantic analysis right away and no one would agree whether you'd done it right. But I'm open to suggestions.