3 ms·

> ideological battle No, I call out double standards and moral preening. I know you're the mod and I don't give a damn if you think it's "ideological" to expec

by mmmpop 4y ago

> ideological battle No, I call out double standards and moral preening. I know you're the mod and I don't give a damn if you think it's "ideological" to expect fair play and if that's the case, fuck this site. So if you ban me, I'd presume it's based on your belief in "moral supremacy" which trumps actual, basic logic that non-college educated people can follow. I know you're better than that, so perhaps call out that the poster that I am disagreeing with on setting a vague honeypot reeking of contempt for those who dare to talk back. Edit: i still have a positive vote count, so democracy says I'm correct, right? Unless you decide to redefine "correct" in which case I declare you're against democracy. For fuck's sake.

dang 4y ago
The issue is that you're breaking the site guidelines, which all exist for good reasons. They're organized around trying to preserve this place for its intended purpose, which is curious conversation on topics of intellectual interest. If you want to keep posting here, we need you to use HN in that spirit: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. You can't judge this by upvotes alone (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=%22upvotes%20alone%22%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...). Lots of things that break the HN guidelines—like sensationalism, indignation, and political battle—routinely get plenty of upvotes. That's why we need moderation in the first place: to help jig the system out of its failure modes. "Calling out" and the like is a really bad marker for HN comments. It's the sort of thing people do from entrenched, emotionally charged, pre-existing positions. Perhaps you're right that others are morally preening or double standarding or whatever, but going on the attack in response is definitely not the curious conversation that this site is supposed to exist for. None of this, btw, has to do with agreeing or disagreeing with your particular views. I don't know or care what those are. This is just routine and obvious HN moderation, and would apply the same way if you were arguing for opposite things.

by mmmpop 4y ago

dang 4y ago

The issue is that you're breaking the site guidelines, which all exist for good reasons. They're organized around trying to preserve this place for its intended purpose, which is curious conversation on topics of intellectual interest. If you want to keep posting here, we need you to use HN in that spirit: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. You can't judge this by upvotes alone (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=%22upvotes%20alone%22%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...). Lots of things that break the HN guidelines—like sensationalism, indignation, and political battle—routinely get plenty of upvotes. That's why we need moderation in the first place: to help jig the system out of its failure modes. "Calling out" and the like is a really bad marker for HN comments. It's the sort of thing people do from entrenched, emotionally charged, pre-existing positions. Perhaps you're right that others are morally preening or double standarding or whatever, but going on the attack in response is definitely not the curious conversation that this site is supposed to exist for. None of this, btw, has to do with agreeing or disagreeing with your particular views. I don't know or care what those are. This is just routine and obvious HN moderation, and would apply the same way if you were arguing for opposite things.