4 ms·

The comment I replied to: "Yea let’s go back to life when most citizens didn’t get a primary school education let alone high school. You think 100% of families

The comment I replied to: "Yea let’s go back to life when most citizens didn’t get a primary school education let alone high school. You think 100% of families will prioritize tuition for toddlers when it’s a discretionary expense? Or will the bid up rent costs?" The fact that this above comment I genuinely replied to was not flagged nor rebuked by yourself, yet my genuine and upvoted response was flagged and rebuked, tells me all I need to know about what you're "trying for."

dang 5y ago
You can't assume that we see all the comments. There are too many for us to see them all: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=likeliest%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor... We do our level best to be even-handed, but it's way too much to expect perfectly consistent moderation, just like it's too much to expect cops to give tickets to all speeders. Of course it always feels like you're the one getting singled out and pulled over, but that's a cognitive bias we all suffer from: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=%22always%20feels%22%20mods%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor... --- It's true that https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28382933 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28382933 was in the flamewar style and shouldn't have been. But that comment was in reply to you (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28382789 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28382789), and your comment was in precisely the same style. So if we're going to try to be consistent here, the transitive logic of finger-pointing at previous comments means you end up pointing at your own. I've scolded both of those comments now.
- quantumBerry 5y ago
  > So if we're going to try to be consistent here, the transitive logic of finger-pointing at previous comments means you end up pointing at your own. Actually it doesn't, because I never claimed that _anyone's_ comment needed to be flagged or rebuked. That's quite the bald face lie. The transitive logic would be that I was saying everyone's response was genuine, including my own. I never flagged nor downvoted anyone's comment, nor communicated with anyone to do so nor advocated for it being done. I think you need to go back and read what I really said: The fact that this above comment I genuinely replied to was not flagged nor rebuked by yourself, yet my genuine and upvoted response was flagged and rebuked, tells me all I need to know about what you're "trying for." Please point out anywhere in my statement that said the above comment needed rebuked or flagged. I hope that your reading comprehension improves as a result of this interaction.
  - dang 5y ago
    I took your comment as a complaint about inconsistency - that still seems to me like a reasonable way to read it, but if that's not what you meant, I apologize for misunderstanding. Please stop posting off-topic complaints now, and please follow the site guidelines and avoid flamewar comments in the future. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

dang 5y ago

You can't assume that we see all the comments. There are too many for us to see them all: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=likeliest%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor... We do our level best to be even-handed, but it's way too much to expect perfectly consistent moderation, just like it's too much to expect cops to give tickets to all speeders. Of course it always feels like you're the one getting singled out and pulled over, but that's a cognitive bias we all suffer from: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=%22always%20feels%22%20mods%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor... --- It's true that https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28382933 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28382933 was in the flamewar style and shouldn't have been. But that comment was in reply to you (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28382789 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28382789), and your comment was in precisely the same style. So if we're going to try to be consistent here, the transitive logic of finger-pointing at previous comments means you end up pointing at your own. I've scolded both of those comments now.

quantumBerry 5y ago
> So if we're going to try to be consistent here, the transitive logic of finger-pointing at previous comments means you end up pointing at your own. Actually it doesn't, because I never claimed that _anyone's_ comment needed to be flagged or rebuked. That's quite the bald face lie. The transitive logic would be that I was saying everyone's response was genuine, including my own. I never flagged nor downvoted anyone's comment, nor communicated with anyone to do so nor advocated for it being done. I think you need to go back and read what I really said: The fact that this above comment I genuinely replied to was not flagged nor rebuked by yourself, yet my genuine and upvoted response was flagged and rebuked, tells me all I need to know about what you're "trying for." Please point out anywhere in my statement that said the above comment needed rebuked or flagged. I hope that your reading comprehension improves as a result of this interaction.
- dang 5y ago
  I took your comment as a complaint about inconsistency - that still seems to me like a reasonable way to read it, but if that's not what you meant, I apologize for misunderstanding. Please stop posting off-topic complaints now, and please follow the site guidelines and avoid flamewar comments in the future. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html