3 ms·

I guess you are new here, but HN is heavily, heavily edited and moderated. Posts get killed all the time, if they don't have their titles changed or URLs swappe

I guess you are new here, but HN is heavily, heavily edited and moderated. Posts get killed all the time, if they don't have their titles changed or URLs swapped, for not being exactly what certain people want, and other posts resurrected because the founder didn't get sufficient traffic. Comments get rethreaded and killed at the drop of a hat as well. The buried comment was a non-mainstream opinion, so not welcome here. We have a flag on the profile screen to see hidden posts and they are often the best posts that point out when something makes no sense, but just happen to be worded slightly rude to someone else's point of view. It's definitely not a place for free thought and people voting up discussable viewpoints they don't happen to agree with. You should just take it as a heavily curated slice of SV echochamber that you can examine, but not modify.

ooobit2 6y ago
I've been here off and on for almost 9 years. For the most part, I expect (and certainly receive) a near continuous stream of amazing, informative, creative, insightful, and above all useful content... for free... from people like you, among others. But this is a buried comment several levels deep, for which the entire stream of cascading parent comments have no votes. It may be a broad generalization to assume wrongthink trolls are the cause, but it follows an observed pattern across social media. SV circlejerk or not, I'm more uncomfortable with the passivity to "definitely not a place for free thought and people voting up discussable viewpoints they don't happen to agree with." I don't care what whomever upvotes; however, downvotes with the intent of burying comments behind a content filter is a deliberate abuse of the system. I'm sure I could find a violation in the TOS too. In the above case, I expect better from engineers, entrepreneurs, and experts in STEM and STEM-proximal fields, because everyone here knows the faulty thinking I just pointed out. If you didn't, if the next person didn't, none of you would have made it through learning basic programming, design, or business logic. No one here would have any basis for expertise in much of anything. We shouldn't defend shrugging at behavior that undermines the authority and influence of this community. Is 13 years of massive success worth shrugging away? We're all smarter than to allow this crap.
blaser-waffle 6y ago
> if they don't have their titles changed or URLs swapped, for not being exactly what certain people want, and other posts resurrected because the founder didn't get sufficient traffic. Disingenuous headlines are a huge problem and are part of "spin" (aka marketing or propaganda effort). All available research -- plus tons of anecdotal experience on /. or HN or reddit -- shows that people never read the links that are posted, and, if they did click the link, probably won't read 100% of it. Most people share links without reading articles as well. The headline is what generates the controversy, and should reflect the actual or original content of the piece. I am okay with mods changing headlines to reflect that. I have no doubt this is a SV echo chamber -- but it's a news aggregator run by Y-combinator, what the hell did you expect? See also: https://www.patheos.com/blogs/nosacredcows/2018/09/study-confirms-most-people-share-articles-based-only-on-headlines/ https://www.patheos.com/blogs/nosacredcows/2018/09/study-con... https://slate.com/technology/2013/06/how-people-read-online-why-you-wont-finish-this-article.html https://slate.com/technology/2013/06/how-people-read-online-... https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/why-we-dont-read-revisited https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/why-we-do... http://thesciencepost.com/study-70-of-facebook-commenters-only-read-the-headline/ http://thesciencepost.com/study-70-of-facebook-commenters-on...

ooobit2 6y ago

I've been here off and on for almost 9 years. For the most part, I expect (and certainly receive) a near continuous stream of amazing, informative, creative, insightful, and above all useful content... for free... from people like you, among others. But this is a buried comment several levels deep, for which the entire stream of cascading parent comments have no votes. It may be a broad generalization to assume wrongthink trolls are the cause, but it follows an observed pattern across social media. SV circlejerk or not, I'm more uncomfortable with the passivity to "definitely not a place for free thought and people voting up discussable viewpoints they don't happen to agree with." I don't care what whomever upvotes; however, downvotes with the intent of burying comments behind a content filter is a deliberate abuse of the system. I'm sure I could find a violation in the TOS too. In the above case, I expect better from engineers, entrepreneurs, and experts in STEM and STEM-proximal fields, because everyone here knows the faulty thinking I just pointed out. If you didn't, if the next person didn't, none of you would have made it through learning basic programming, design, or business logic. No one here would have any basis for expertise in much of anything. We shouldn't defend shrugging at behavior that undermines the authority and influence of this community. Is 13 years of massive success worth shrugging away? We're all smarter than to allow this crap.

blaser-waffle 6y ago

> if they don't have their titles changed or URLs swapped, for not being exactly what certain people want, and other posts resurrected because the founder didn't get sufficient traffic. Disingenuous headlines are a huge problem and are part of "spin" (aka marketing or propaganda effort). All available research -- plus tons of anecdotal experience on /. or HN or reddit -- shows that people never read the links that are posted, and, if they did click the link, probably won't read 100% of it. Most people share links without reading articles as well. The headline is what generates the controversy, and should reflect the actual or original content of the piece. I am okay with mods changing headlines to reflect that. I have no doubt this is a SV echo chamber -- but it's a news aggregator run by Y-combinator, what the hell did you expect? See also: https://www.patheos.com/blogs/nosacredcows/2018/09/study-confirms-most-people-share-articles-based-only-on-headlines/ https://www.patheos.com/blogs/nosacredcows/2018/09/study-con... https://slate.com/technology/2013/06/how-people-read-online-why-you-wont-finish-this-article.html https://slate.com/technology/2013/06/how-people-read-online-... https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/why-we-dont-read-revisited https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/why-we-do... http://thesciencepost.com/study-70-of-facebook-commenters-only-read-the-headline/ http://thesciencepost.com/study-70-of-facebook-commenters-on...