6 ms·

What flagging achieves in many cases is nothing more than turning this site into an echo chamber. One can choose to throw the baby out with the bath water, but

by jikbd 5y ago

What flagging achieves in many cases is nothing more than turning this site into an echo chamber. One can choose to throw the baby out with the bath water, but let’s not pretend that’s the best approach. It’s a bunch of people nodding at one another all the time.

Mikeb85 5y ago
Dunno, Reddit and other platforms are much more of an echo chamber. You see dissenting opinions on HN far more often.
- dr_dshiv 5y ago
  Let's agree to disagree on that, shall we?
  - ethbr0 5y ago
    Can't tell if written ironically or not. :)
- jimbob45 5y ago
  I think I'd struggle to find five threads in all of reddit for which "sort by top" and "sort by controversial" don't yield dissenting opinions.
  - Mikeb85 5y ago
    More about how some subs ban the hell out of dissenting opinions. Look how r/politics morphed in the last 6 or so years. A few regional subs I frequent are the same way and are completely unrepresentative of the actual region. The Alberta (Canadian province) sub for example is basically just a bunch of kids who've never left home that think communism is a great idea lamenting why the rest of the province does want to leave their homes. It's such an un-representative sub it's actually hilarious, these days I basically only go for the Covid updates. Yes, some subs are OK, I mean, Reddit's model is that each sub is its own world and moderators can more or less do what they want. But on the whole, HN has more (respectful) dissenting opinions versus Reddit's most subs are echo chambers and the rest are anarchy.
    - jimbob45 5y ago
      I feel fairly strongly that r/politics is fine the way it is. If you sort by controversial, you're still free to peruse uncensored dissenting opinions. Sure, there may be some astroturfing and sure, the articles may be cherry-picked, but the sub overall is welcome to healthy debate. Contrast this with r/conservative, where > 50% of threads are locked to members only where membership is gained by demonstrating that you only express right-wing opinions (I'm not making this up). Even further, you can still be banned as a non-member for expressing views too far outside right-wing orthodoxy. r/politics seems like a shangri-la for political debate in comparison.
      - Mikeb85 5y ago
        > I feel fairly strongly that r/politics is fine the way it is. > Contrast this with r/conservative, where > 50% of threads are locked to members only where membership is gained by demonstrating that you only express right-wing opinions (I'm not making this up). Did you frequent r/politics circa 2016? There was a very obvious point when Bernie supporters and Trump supporters alike were driven out, and where all views essentially became pro-Clinton and pro-establishment overnight. Before that, it was a place that was pretty inclusive of views from the whole spectrum.
    - KennyBlanken 5y ago
      Look at the discussion thread Dang waxes poetically in and note that he doesn't moderate several significantly more flamebait-y, political comments that happen to be on the others side of the political fence. Example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27164027 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27164027
      - Mikeb85 5y ago
        Yes, Dang is a good moderator and HN is still my favourite discussion board on the internet in large part due to their approach to moderation.
      - jimbob45 5y ago
        Yes, Dang misses some, but I think the idea is that some posts fall through the cracks but if you routinely break the rules, you're going to eventually get flagged/banned. That way, we avoid a lot of false positive flags/bans that would otherwise be unjustly punished on Reddit.
SavantIdiot 5y ago
I'm not sure that's a bad thing. If you're on a knitting forum and people keep talking about fantasy football, they deserve to be flagged. The problem with my analogy is that hobbies aren't opinions, but I think that's a great reason for people with different opinions to start their own discussion forums. Is that acceptable or does this site have to be all things to all people?
- hunterb123 5y ago
  The difference is political articles are allowed, but political comments aren't. Well, it depends when they are allowed, sometimes.
  - SavantIdiot 5y ago
    Yeah, I don't get that either. It feels like a Roreshach test and I never know the answer. I'd prefer if there were fewer discussions on this site about issues where the stakes involve oppression, persecution, and death, and more discussions about text editors, frameworks, and infosec. But the last one in that list makes a big Ouroboros out of my argument...
  - ativzzz 5y ago
    Political comments are very much allowed. The issue is how people present political comments. Most people present them in the same way they would on a subreddit for their particular political ideation, which is more akin to an echo-chamber and not conducive to the conversation that HN is trying to accomplish. High quality, well intended comments are fine, but people have trouble making high quality well intended political comments, and even more trouble realizing that their comments are not high quality or well intended to others.
    - hunterb123 5y ago
      No, they aren't allowed, but it depends on when the wind blows. Even if you are cordial and present your point perfectly dang may hit you with a: > Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity. When it comes to the user moderation, it really doesn't matter how you present it, if the political comment goes against the grain, it will be flagged and it will be deleted.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
mindcrime 5y ago
"Echo chamber" is meaningless nonsense at this point. That's just a phrase people throw out to indicate displeasure with any conversation that doesn't cater to their particular biases. It's basically become another "thought terminating cliche"[1]. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28246850 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28246850
- fragmede 5y ago
  Not really, or rather, it depends on who's calling what an echo chamber. If someone's using it to shut down discussion, then yeah sure. But if you can't recognize when you're in one, then you're the one losing out. This is especially important when interacting with sales people, who benefit greatly from customers who won't or can't or don't look critically at their product offerings, and if their prices are at all reasonable.

by jikbd 5y ago

Mikeb85 5y ago

Dunno, Reddit and other platforms are much more of an echo chamber. You see dissenting opinions on HN far more often.

dr_dshiv 5y ago
Let's agree to disagree on that, shall we?
- ethbr0 5y ago
  Can't tell if written ironically or not. :)
jimbob45 5y ago
I think I'd struggle to find five threads in all of reddit for which "sort by top" and "sort by controversial" don't yield dissenting opinions.
- Mikeb85 5y ago
  More about how some subs ban the hell out of dissenting opinions. Look how r/politics morphed in the last 6 or so years. A few regional subs I frequent are the same way and are completely unrepresentative of the actual region. The Alberta (Canadian province) sub for example is basically just a bunch of kids who've never left home that think communism is a great idea lamenting why the rest of the province does want to leave their homes. It's such an un-representative sub it's actually hilarious, these days I basically only go for the Covid updates. Yes, some subs are OK, I mean, Reddit's model is that each sub is its own world and moderators can more or less do what they want. But on the whole, HN has more (respectful) dissenting opinions versus Reddit's most subs are echo chambers and the rest are anarchy.
  - jimbob45 5y ago
    I feel fairly strongly that r/politics is fine the way it is. If you sort by controversial, you're still free to peruse uncensored dissenting opinions. Sure, there may be some astroturfing and sure, the articles may be cherry-picked, but the sub overall is welcome to healthy debate. Contrast this with r/conservative, where > 50% of threads are locked to members only where membership is gained by demonstrating that you only express right-wing opinions (I'm not making this up). Even further, you can still be banned as a non-member for expressing views too far outside right-wing orthodoxy. r/politics seems like a shangri-la for political debate in comparison.
    - Mikeb85 5y ago
      > I feel fairly strongly that r/politics is fine the way it is. > Contrast this with r/conservative, where > 50% of threads are locked to members only where membership is gained by demonstrating that you only express right-wing opinions (I'm not making this up). Did you frequent r/politics circa 2016? There was a very obvious point when Bernie supporters and Trump supporters alike were driven out, and where all views essentially became pro-Clinton and pro-establishment overnight. Before that, it was a place that was pretty inclusive of views from the whole spectrum.
  - KennyBlanken 5y ago
    Look at the discussion thread Dang waxes poetically in and note that he doesn't moderate several significantly more flamebait-y, political comments that happen to be on the others side of the political fence. Example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27164027 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27164027
    - Mikeb85 5y ago
      Yes, Dang is a good moderator and HN is still my favourite discussion board on the internet in large part due to their approach to moderation.
    - jimbob45 5y ago
      Yes, Dang misses some, but I think the idea is that some posts fall through the cracks but if you routinely break the rules, you're going to eventually get flagged/banned. That way, we avoid a lot of false positive flags/bans that would otherwise be unjustly punished on Reddit.

SavantIdiot 5y ago

I'm not sure that's a bad thing. If you're on a knitting forum and people keep talking about fantasy football, they deserve to be flagged. The problem with my analogy is that hobbies aren't opinions, but I think that's a great reason for people with different opinions to start their own discussion forums. Is that acceptable or does this site have to be all things to all people?

hunterb123 5y ago
The difference is political articles are allowed, but political comments aren't. Well, it depends when they are allowed, sometimes.
- SavantIdiot 5y ago
  Yeah, I don't get that either. It feels like a Roreshach test and I never know the answer. I'd prefer if there were fewer discussions on this site about issues where the stakes involve oppression, persecution, and death, and more discussions about text editors, frameworks, and infosec. But the last one in that list makes a big Ouroboros out of my argument...
- ativzzz 5y ago
  Political comments are very much allowed. The issue is how people present political comments. Most people present them in the same way they would on a subreddit for their particular political ideation, which is more akin to an echo-chamber and not conducive to the conversation that HN is trying to accomplish. High quality, well intended comments are fine, but people have trouble making high quality well intended political comments, and even more trouble realizing that their comments are not high quality or well intended to others.
  - hunterb123 5y ago
    No, they aren't allowed, but it depends on when the wind blows. Even if you are cordial and present your point perfectly dang may hit you with a: > Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity. When it comes to the user moderation, it really doesn't matter how you present it, if the political comment goes against the grain, it will be flagged and it will be deleted.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

mindcrime 5y ago

"Echo chamber" is meaningless nonsense at this point. That's just a phrase people throw out to indicate displeasure with any conversation that doesn't cater to their particular biases. It's basically become another "thought terminating cliche"[1]. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28246850 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28246850

fragmede 5y ago
Not really, or rather, it depends on who's calling what an echo chamber. If someone's using it to shut down discussion, then yeah sure. But if you can't recognize when you're in one, then you're the one losing out. This is especially important when interacting with sales people, who benefit greatly from customers who won't or can't or don't look critically at their product offerings, and if their prices are at all reasonable.