4 ms·

HN is essentially a hive mind cult. Look at my join date. At some point, you could dissent with your own opinion. Nowadays it’s downvotes and outrage. Shields

HN is essentially a hive mind cult. Look at my join date. At some point, you could dissent with your own opinion. Nowadays it’s downvotes and outrage. Shields up — ready for the downvotes. Not a great model for FB to follow. You’ll start getting DMs from people like “dang” telling you to behave, LOL.

xiphias2 7y ago
As for me, I didn't get a DM, just a shadow ban for a controversial comment (xiphias is my original user name). A few months after not ever being voted up somebody wrote to me that she sees that I'm shadow banned even though I'm writing constructive comments. At the same time I don't know anything even comparable to HN, so I shy away from controversial wording / topics, and this way things that I write goes through the ,,dang'' filter. I still think that he's much more constructive than what would be here without him at this scale of (non-geek) users.
- fourstar 7y ago
  Lobsters is probably the closest, I’d think. It’s not super active, though. Why not build it yourself? I got shadowbanned on Reddit after creating one of the more popular subreddits. It’s a weird feeling. With decentralized moderation, who sets the constitution? This is why AI/ML in response to this self-governance stuff is a meme.
  - xiphias2 7y ago
    I don't need decentralized moderation actually, I would prefer highlighting comments of people that I like and people that they like. This would be enough for me to find constructive smart people. The why not I build part: network effects are strong, so I think it's really hard to do something that people would use.
- dang 7y ago
  You weren't shadowbanned—we told you explicitly: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15725493 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15725493.
  - xiphias2 7y ago
    Ah, I see, thanks! I was still posting and didn't see any sign that my account is banned, maybe it would be a good feature for HN (or not being able to log in).
hinkley 7y ago
It's a schizophrenic hive mind cult. I think I see some patterns where topics that used to get downvoted get upvotes instead, and I hope that's because others have decided that they don't like what this says about the community, and so they upvote them on general principle. (The Cynic worries that someone's astroturfing budget ran out).
- krapp 7y ago
  It seems schizophrenic because there really isn't a hivemind. Rather, there are various mutually antagonistic groups who differ in their beliefs in what the "hivemind" represents (as opposed to "authentic" Hacker News culture,) based on their suspicions about what sinister conspiracy is behind moderation and comments contrary to their point of view. Almost no one here seems to trust that people who disagree with them are ever posting in good faith. Whether a topic gets upvoted or downvoted seems to depend on which camp gets to it first, and the bias introduced by the first comment, which will inevitably determine how long the topic lasts, barring moderator intervention.
  - pferde 7y ago
    I have noticed this trend as well. That is why I read HN with dead comments enabled, and vouch+upvote a dead comment whenever I think it adds to the discussion (e.g. brings new info or brings up a point or angle that I haven't seen in that thread and makes me stop and think about it for a second or two), regardless of whether or not I agree with that comment. Sometimes good comments end up forgotten, just because someone got to them first, who disagrees with them and is not intellectually mature enough to handle that.
dang 7y ago
I'm always curious about claims that HN is degenerating. Where are those dissenting opinions of which you speak? I took a look, and didn't find any. I did see several early comments by your account, including its very first one, that were downvoted. Which comments were downvoted vs. not seemed consistent with what would get downvoted today, though today they'd probably get downvoted more—probably because there are many more readers who can downvote things.
- barry-cotter 7y ago
  > I'm always curious about claims that HN is degenerating. Where are those dissenting opinions of which you speak? You banned yummyfajitas, aka Chris Stucchio. That was where the elves left Middle Earth for me.
  - dang 7y ago
    That's strange, because we did not ban him.
- vl 7y ago
  It’s degenerating in multiple aspects: Fewer constructive discussions due to aggressive downvoting based not on the quality of argument, but on the opinion expressed. More junk on the front page, this is general trend in attention economy, so somewhat unavoidable. One of the telling things is structure of the titles. Few years ago titles where more informative, now more clickbaity on average.
  - dang 7y ago
    The problem is that these perceptions are very much in the eye of the beholder. As the saying goes, things have always been getting worse. If anyone can come up with an objective measure for any of this, I'd be interested. As far as I can tell, though, these perceptions are strongly affected by the fact that the things that we dislike make a much stronger impression than the rest of what we see. From my perspective, the downvoting isn't more aggressive than it used to be, there isn't more junk on the front page than there used to be (though there might be more ideologically conflictual material, since society is moving in that direction), and the titles aren't more baity than they used to be, since we edit most of the bad ones. I'm biased, though, and conditioned by the moderation job. The interesting question is whether there's a way to get beyond such biases.
dredmorbius 7y ago
There are several identifiable commenting communities, and quite a few different voices. I consider myself a dissident voice. Whilst my input isn't always appreciated, it often is, and I've found some measure of success pressing back against several of the more notable hivemind sentiments. Not taking the challenge personally helps. Finding your own best argument also. Persistence pays off.

xiphias2 7y ago

As for me, I didn't get a DM, just a shadow ban for a controversial comment (xiphias is my original user name). A few months after not ever being voted up somebody wrote to me that she sees that I'm shadow banned even though I'm writing constructive comments. At the same time I don't know anything even comparable to HN, so I shy away from controversial wording / topics, and this way things that I write goes through the ,,dang'' filter. I still think that he's much more constructive than what would be here without him at this scale of (non-geek) users.

fourstar 7y ago
Lobsters is probably the closest, I’d think. It’s not super active, though. Why not build it yourself? I got shadowbanned on Reddit after creating one of the more popular subreddits. It’s a weird feeling. With decentralized moderation, who sets the constitution? This is why AI/ML in response to this self-governance stuff is a meme.
- xiphias2 7y ago
  I don't need decentralized moderation actually, I would prefer highlighting comments of people that I like and people that they like. This would be enough for me to find constructive smart people. The why not I build part: network effects are strong, so I think it's really hard to do something that people would use.
dang 7y ago
You weren't shadowbanned—we told you explicitly: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15725493 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15725493.
- xiphias2 7y ago
  Ah, I see, thanks! I was still posting and didn't see any sign that my account is banned, maybe it would be a good feature for HN (or not being able to log in).

hinkley 7y ago

It's a schizophrenic hive mind cult. I think I see some patterns where topics that used to get downvoted get upvotes instead, and I hope that's because others have decided that they don't like what this says about the community, and so they upvote them on general principle. (The Cynic worries that someone's astroturfing budget ran out).

krapp 7y ago
It seems schizophrenic because there really isn't a hivemind. Rather, there are various mutually antagonistic groups who differ in their beliefs in what the "hivemind" represents (as opposed to "authentic" Hacker News culture,) based on their suspicions about what sinister conspiracy is behind moderation and comments contrary to their point of view. Almost no one here seems to trust that people who disagree with them are ever posting in good faith. Whether a topic gets upvoted or downvoted seems to depend on which camp gets to it first, and the bias introduced by the first comment, which will inevitably determine how long the topic lasts, barring moderator intervention.
- pferde 7y ago
  I have noticed this trend as well. That is why I read HN with dead comments enabled, and vouch+upvote a dead comment whenever I think it adds to the discussion (e.g. brings new info or brings up a point or angle that I haven't seen in that thread and makes me stop and think about it for a second or two), regardless of whether or not I agree with that comment. Sometimes good comments end up forgotten, just because someone got to them first, who disagrees with them and is not intellectually mature enough to handle that.

dang 7y ago

I'm always curious about claims that HN is degenerating. Where are those dissenting opinions of which you speak? I took a look, and didn't find any. I did see several early comments by your account, including its very first one, that were downvoted. Which comments were downvoted vs. not seemed consistent with what would get downvoted today, though today they'd probably get downvoted more—probably because there are many more readers who can downvote things.

barry-cotter 7y ago
> I'm always curious about claims that HN is degenerating. Where are those dissenting opinions of which you speak? You banned yummyfajitas, aka Chris Stucchio. That was where the elves left Middle Earth for me.
- dang 7y ago
  That's strange, because we did not ban him.
vl 7y ago
It’s degenerating in multiple aspects: Fewer constructive discussions due to aggressive downvoting based not on the quality of argument, but on the opinion expressed. More junk on the front page, this is general trend in attention economy, so somewhat unavoidable. One of the telling things is structure of the titles. Few years ago titles where more informative, now more clickbaity on average.
- dang 7y ago
  The problem is that these perceptions are very much in the eye of the beholder. As the saying goes, things have always been getting worse. If anyone can come up with an objective measure for any of this, I'd be interested. As far as I can tell, though, these perceptions are strongly affected by the fact that the things that we dislike make a much stronger impression than the rest of what we see. From my perspective, the downvoting isn't more aggressive than it used to be, there isn't more junk on the front page than there used to be (though there might be more ideologically conflictual material, since society is moving in that direction), and the titles aren't more baity than they used to be, since we edit most of the bad ones. I'm biased, though, and conditioned by the moderation job. The interesting question is whether there's a way to get beyond such biases.

dredmorbius 7y ago

There are several identifiable commenting communities, and quite a few different voices. I consider myself a dissident voice. Whilst my input isn't always appreciated, it often is, and I've found some measure of success pressing back against several of the more notable hivemind sentiments. Not taking the challenge personally helps. Finding your own best argument also. Persistence pays off.