14 ms·

First easy test I posted was a link to a domain that gets blocked here (legit content). While it's just a tech demo site, I hope it will turn into an experiment

by strmpnk 15y ago

First easy test I posted was a link to a domain that gets blocked here (legit content). While it's just a tech demo site, I hope it will turn into an experiment for new ideas, particularly with the right balance between Y-combinator startups and their competitors (blocked submissions on HN).

sid6376 15y ago
I did not know HN blocked legit content. Can you give me an example?
- strmpnk 15y ago
  Nodejitsu's blog is the example I was referring too. Edit: submissions will silently be hidden. Following the link below brings me to a blank page. Also nothing on the new tab.
  - viraptor 15y ago
    That's strange... could someone confirm? I would be very disappointed if that was true and not widely known. On the other hand, I didn't have any problems with submitting that link: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3146239 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3146239
    - genieyclo 15y ago
      Here is the list of banned sites: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=499044 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=499044 "The great majority are banned for spamming and/or voting rings. Others (like url shortening services, squidoo, etc) are banned because they're often used by spammers. Others are banned for the reasons I listed in that recent essay: linkjacking, being offtopic, or characteristically being fluff."
      - mmahemoff 15y ago
        Thanks, didn't know about that. 3 years old though, I'm assuming there's a more up-to-date list in operation.
    - marakmarak 15y ago
      FYI, that link is "silently banned". The link appears fine in your session. Try the link from a new session / IP. You'll see it's dead.
  - llambda 15y ago
    Perhaps this is related to the track record of at least one of the Nodejitsu founders (digging a little there's a fair amount of blog-related drama although not on their blog so maybe this isn't a fair evaluation)? Although in principle I agree that "legitimate content" shouldn't be blocked, if spam has happened from or is related to a blog it's only reasonable to expect that such a blog might become blocked (how else should the moderators handle this?), the other legitimate content notwithstanding.
    - lclarkmichalek 15y ago
      At least on reddit, if Marak Squires posts anything at all, drama follows (justified or not). Maybe it's for the best that it can't be posted here.
    - rwaldron 15y ago
      "Perhaps this is related to the track record of at least one of the Nodejitsu founders" This is irrelevant to applications hosted on his company's domain.
  - mnemonicsloth 15y ago
    Just speculating, but silence seems like the right behavior for dealing with spam submissions. If you tell spammers when you reject their posts, they'll just start working on spams that are harder to filter.
pg 15y ago
We don't ban sites of competitors of companies we fund. Even if we wanted to do something like that, how could we ever get away with it? I'm guessing you're referring to Nodejitsu.com. They're banned because they created an army of sockpuppets to vote up their posts.
- strmpnk 15y ago
  A fair argument, but I don't see how excluding content without transparency is any better. At the very least you could let people know why or what is happening when something is submitted. Not all communities need to overlap and it's HN's decision for what goes here. Also, you'd be better off if your guidelines included some wording on this. As for the competitors line, I was possibly confused by past drama certain threads that there was something going on with that. Sorry for any misinformation this may have spread. It might be to everyone's advantage to ensure that there is a proper way to communicate with HN to get someone unbanned (I am not with Nodejitsu but I'm sure they'd be willing to talk). There is good content on that blog.
  - pg 15y ago
    I don't see how excluding content without transparency is any better. You can see everything that gets killed by turning on showdead in your profile.
    - strmpnk 15y ago
      I think it's more about informing the person submitting. Most people who hear about this are surprised and had no idea. It might be solving the problem of transparency from the wrong end.
      - pg 15y ago
        When we kill something it's almost always for some form of abuse: usually spamming, or in a handful of cases for particularly egregious sockpuppet upvotes. I don't feel like we owe such people much. Plus the more you tell them, the easier you make it to get around you.

by strmpnk 15y ago

sid6376 15y ago

I did not know HN blocked legit content. Can you give me an example?

strmpnk 15y ago
Nodejitsu's blog is the example I was referring too. Edit: submissions will silently be hidden. Following the link below brings me to a blank page. Also nothing on the new tab.
- viraptor 15y ago
  That's strange... could someone confirm? I would be very disappointed if that was true and not widely known. On the other hand, I didn't have any problems with submitting that link: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3146239 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3146239
  - genieyclo 15y ago
    Here is the list of banned sites: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=499044 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=499044 "The great majority are banned for spamming and/or voting rings. Others (like url shortening services, squidoo, etc) are banned because they're often used by spammers. Others are banned for the reasons I listed in that recent essay: linkjacking, being offtopic, or characteristically being fluff."
    - mmahemoff 15y ago
      Thanks, didn't know about that. 3 years old though, I'm assuming there's a more up-to-date list in operation.
  - marakmarak 15y ago
    FYI, that link is "silently banned". The link appears fine in your session. Try the link from a new session / IP. You'll see it's dead.
- llambda 15y ago
  Perhaps this is related to the track record of at least one of the Nodejitsu founders (digging a little there's a fair amount of blog-related drama although not on their blog so maybe this isn't a fair evaluation)? Although in principle I agree that "legitimate content" shouldn't be blocked, if spam has happened from or is related to a blog it's only reasonable to expect that such a blog might become blocked (how else should the moderators handle this?), the other legitimate content notwithstanding.
  - lclarkmichalek 15y ago
    At least on reddit, if Marak Squires posts anything at all, drama follows (justified or not). Maybe it's for the best that it can't be posted here.
  - rwaldron 15y ago
    "Perhaps this is related to the track record of at least one of the Nodejitsu founders" This is irrelevant to applications hosted on his company's domain.
- mnemonicsloth 15y ago
  Just speculating, but silence seems like the right behavior for dealing with spam submissions. If you tell spammers when you reject their posts, they'll just start working on spams that are harder to filter.

pg 15y ago

We don't ban sites of competitors of companies we fund. Even if we wanted to do something like that, how could we ever get away with it? I'm guessing you're referring to Nodejitsu.com. They're banned because they created an army of sockpuppets to vote up their posts.

strmpnk 15y ago
A fair argument, but I don't see how excluding content without transparency is any better. At the very least you could let people know why or what is happening when something is submitted. Not all communities need to overlap and it's HN's decision for what goes here. Also, you'd be better off if your guidelines included some wording on this. As for the competitors line, I was possibly confused by past drama certain threads that there was something going on with that. Sorry for any misinformation this may have spread. It might be to everyone's advantage to ensure that there is a proper way to communicate with HN to get someone unbanned (I am not with Nodejitsu but I'm sure they'd be willing to talk). There is good content on that blog.
- pg 15y ago
  I don't see how excluding content without transparency is any better. You can see everything that gets killed by turning on showdead in your profile.
  - strmpnk 15y ago
    I think it's more about informing the person submitting. Most people who hear about this are surprised and had no idea. It might be solving the problem of transparency from the wrong end.
    - pg 15y ago
      When we kill something it's almost always for some form of abuse: usually spamming, or in a handful of cases for particularly egregious sockpuppet upvotes. I don't feel like we owe such people much. Plus the more you tell them, the easier you make it to get around you.