4 ms·

The problem is when a submitter wants to follow the site guidelines, as OP did.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
gameswithgo 6y ago
You can be correct, or you can get traction. I think a lot of technical people don't understand this. They get mad at people like say, Greta Thunberg, for not being purely clinical, accurate, scientific and dispassionate. But, meanwhile the people working to make the world believe climate change is fake are emotional, manipulative, and actually get traction against pure, reasoned, calm argument. So do we want to be correct, or do we want to win?
- emeerson 6y ago
  Interesting to present it as a binary tradeoff. I want to win, but I want to make sure that the thesis has some modeling diligence =)
- JRKrause 6y ago
  This becomes especially complicated when some folks (such as myself) have, for better or worse, developed a gag reflex that is triggered by overly emotional or manipulative content. Even if we agree with the message it can be hard to willingly align yourself with people who are 'cheating' in this sense.
- Frost1x 6y ago
  >So do we want to be correct, or do we want to win? It's nice if you can do both. Unfortunately, most systems in the world are actively being gamed which means adding additional constraints to systems (like being correct, clear, forthcoming, honest, etc.) often put you at a disadvantage.
- NoInputSignal 6y ago
  Is HN actually based on this premise of winning? I come here to escape that premise in media (social or otherwise).
  - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
    Any site that tracks the "score" of your contributions and then makes your "score" visible on most pages is going to be about winnings whether that's the stated goal or not. That is a textbook way to gamify things. Obviously this applies more to comments than to submissions but the comments are a large part of the user experience here so whether HN is "based on this premise of winning" boils down to a question of the importance of the comment section.
    - hckr_news 6y ago
      Dopamine feedback from imaginary points, and validation from mostly like minded peers makes users keep coming back to this website. Otherwise user retention would non-existent.
- ballenf 6y ago
  Is there a name for the phenomenon where your opponent always seems to be playing more dirty? Or where it's hard to see your own's side's emotional manipulation for what it is? I know I've often fallen prey to this effect. You feel like your team has a disadvantage and then think the other team crazy when they claim the same. Almost like our brains are trying desperately to let us feel justified in relaxing our moral code.
  - dwaltrip 6y ago
    Cognitive dissonance is the uncomfortable feeling when one sees through the effect you are describing. Perhaps "illusory cognitive consonance"? It's a bit of a mouthful... Of course, confirmation biases and other related phenomena help us construct and reinforce these perspectives.
    - lainga 6y ago
      The Frollo effect? judge Claude Frollo longed to purge the world of vice and sin / and he saw corruption everywhere, except within.
- glitchc 6y ago
  What is it that you want to win exactly? Control? The right to tell people what to do? I’d much rather be correct, and let people make their own decisions. Otherwise this thing you call “freedom” is just empty words on a bit of paper.
  - avmich 6y ago
    > What is it that you want to win exactly? Control? The right to tell people what to do? No, not control - principal reduction of problems associated with climate crisis.
    - glitchc 6y ago
      That’s not going to happen without a huge cutback in our standard of living. The other side knows this, that’s why they fight so hard.
      - avmich 6y ago
        Don't understand what you mean other than this: different reality. Climate crisis is going to be the cause of a huge cutback in our standard of living. Science.
  - rootusrootus 6y ago
    Persuasion isn't control, though. And being coldly analytical is only feasible if everyone agrees.
  - sjg007 6y ago
    It's more of last comment standing.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

You can be correct, or you can get traction. I think a lot of technical people don't understand this. They get mad at people like say, Greta Thunberg, for not being purely clinical, accurate, scientific and dispassionate. But, meanwhile the people working to make the world believe climate change is fake are emotional, manipulative, and actually get traction against pure, reasoned, calm argument. So do we want to be correct, or do we want to win?

emeerson 6y ago
Interesting to present it as a binary tradeoff. I want to win, but I want to make sure that the thesis has some modeling diligence =)
JRKrause 6y ago
This becomes especially complicated when some folks (such as myself) have, for better or worse, developed a gag reflex that is triggered by overly emotional or manipulative content. Even if we agree with the message it can be hard to willingly align yourself with people who are 'cheating' in this sense.
Frost1x 6y ago
>So do we want to be correct, or do we want to win? It's nice if you can do both. Unfortunately, most systems in the world are actively being gamed which means adding additional constraints to systems (like being correct, clear, forthcoming, honest, etc.) often put you at a disadvantage.
NoInputSignal 6y ago
Is HN actually based on this premise of winning? I come here to escape that premise in media (social or otherwise).
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  Any site that tracks the "score" of your contributions and then makes your "score" visible on most pages is going to be about winnings whether that's the stated goal or not. That is a textbook way to gamify things. Obviously this applies more to comments than to submissions but the comments are a large part of the user experience here so whether HN is "based on this premise of winning" boils down to a question of the importance of the comment section.
  - hckr_news 6y ago
    Dopamine feedback from imaginary points, and validation from mostly like minded peers makes users keep coming back to this website. Otherwise user retention would non-existent.
ballenf 6y ago
Is there a name for the phenomenon where your opponent always seems to be playing more dirty? Or where it's hard to see your own's side's emotional manipulation for what it is? I know I've often fallen prey to this effect. You feel like your team has a disadvantage and then think the other team crazy when they claim the same. Almost like our brains are trying desperately to let us feel justified in relaxing our moral code.
- dwaltrip 6y ago
  Cognitive dissonance is the uncomfortable feeling when one sees through the effect you are describing. Perhaps "illusory cognitive consonance"? It's a bit of a mouthful... Of course, confirmation biases and other related phenomena help us construct and reinforce these perspectives.
  - lainga 6y ago
    The Frollo effect? judge Claude Frollo longed to purge the world of vice and sin / and he saw corruption everywhere, except within.
glitchc 6y ago
What is it that you want to win exactly? Control? The right to tell people what to do? I’d much rather be correct, and let people make their own decisions. Otherwise this thing you call “freedom” is just empty words on a bit of paper.
- avmich 6y ago
  > What is it that you want to win exactly? Control? The right to tell people what to do? No, not control - principal reduction of problems associated with climate crisis.
  - glitchc 6y ago
    That’s not going to happen without a huge cutback in our standard of living. The other side knows this, that’s why they fight so hard.
    - avmich 6y ago
      Don't understand what you mean other than this: different reality. Climate crisis is going to be the cause of a huge cutback in our standard of living. Science.
- rootusrootus 6y ago
  Persuasion isn't control, though. And being coldly analytical is only feasible if everyone agrees.
- sjg007 6y ago
  It's more of last comment standing.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]