4 ms·

I contribute to this forum in good faith, I strongly disagree with this ban.

dang 4y ago
Edit: I've taken another look at this and decided that this was partly an overreaction on my part—sorry for that. I've unbanned you now. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and mitigate the ways that you've been breaking the rules, that would be helpful so we don't end up in this boat again. --- That may be, but you still have to follow the rules. You broke them here, have broken them elsewhere, we've warned you many times, and I've just told you how to get unbanned if you want to.
- ralusek 4y ago
  Thank you very much. I will do a full review of my warnings and the rules. I'm a huge fan of this forum, and would hate to lose access to one of the only outlets left where people seem to be willing to think out loud. I think the level of moderation here (you) generally does a good job of striking the proper balance between free thought and destructive chaos, and I can appreciate the difficulty of handling any borderline cases.
machina_ex_deus 4y ago
I think HN moderation is intolerant of people with more assertive form of expression. It's pretty sad because people here come from different cultures and different personalities, and some people just naturally express themselves more assertively, cynically or provocatively. Some people prefer hypocrisy and softened words and respect for others, while others prefer getting a clear point across, and using cynicism and exaggeration are valid tools for that. Looking at previous posts of this person, he's clearly naturally cynical. Does that merit ban? Should all cynical people walk on the tips of their toes in HN to avoid "flamebait" ? In the name of protecting those easily offendable, we're becoming intolerant of those who don't understand subtle nuances. Or those that just have to respond. Or those coming from cultures with naturally less tact. This poster didn't even open up the problematic subject himself but responded to someone else.
- throwawaylinux 4y ago
  > I think HN moderation is intolerant of people with more assertive form of expression. It absolutely isn't when that expression is Correct™. You can blather about Brexit horrible and its voters are deluded or selfish, but you have to tread carefully if you voice the opinion that the EU is not roses or Brexit is the better alternative. You must be very polite and non-confrontational about it. Same as covid. You could rant and rave about anybody questioning the ever-changing official narrative and denounce them as science deniers and selfish, and that was pretty well tolerated. Asking any questions or expressing any doubt would have to be done extremely carefully again. Same as any topic. This is better than most places I've found though. At least you can be in the minority, question authority, and have "wrong" opinions about many (not all) things. You are definitely not afforded the same privilege as others though. Which shouldn't be a surprise, you have to learn to read a room, especially a room in somebody else's house.
  - Aloha 4y ago
    Brexit being bad does not make the EU good and leaving it a notable decline. If nothing else (ignoring short term economic issues) it reduces the soft power that the UK had notably. The EU is not without a great many issues, notably the weakness is the central banking mechanisms of the EU/Euro - and the Euro in inseparable from the EU, and tbh, kinda endemic of the issues with the EU. It's an almost country, its missing the accountability of a full country, but still has some sovereign powers. I think the flaws in the EU are fixable, but not without making it look more like a democratic supranational government. However, for all of the EU's flaws - the UK is hurting now, largely because of Brexit - who knows, in 50 years it may turn out for the best. But I honestly suspect not - only time will tell.
    - throwawaylinux 4y ago
      I didn't want to debate the merits of Brexit, I'm not from there or the EU nor have studied the subject closely so it's not my place. I do think it's reasonable that you have those opinions of it and want to put them forward to debate and convince and learn. But I also think people holding opposite opinions, that Brexit didn't reduce soft-power or that a reduction in soft power is not a real problem, or that the EU is not fixable, or that it's not worth staying in the EU hoping it will be fixed, or that UK is not hurting now because of Brexit, or whatever -- are also opinions that a reasonable person might have and put forward in good faith. I do think the banned comment was the tired, tiresome kind of thing that people who feel passionately seem to find a way to shoehorn into discussions where they are off topic or add nothing substantive. And I think the comment they replied to was as well. I don't really see much difference, other than the nature of the opinion. Yes the banned poster did address their parent specifically, but... really the parent put out their opinion about a bunch of things, if that is substantive then it should invite questions or disagreements so addressing them on the topic of their opinions is appropriate, surely.

dang 4y ago

Edit: I've taken another look at this and decided that this was partly an overreaction on my part—sorry for that. I've unbanned you now. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and mitigate the ways that you've been breaking the rules, that would be helpful so we don't end up in this boat again. --- That may be, but you still have to follow the rules. You broke them here, have broken them elsewhere, we've warned you many times, and I've just told you how to get unbanned if you want to.

ralusek 4y ago
Thank you very much. I will do a full review of my warnings and the rules. I'm a huge fan of this forum, and would hate to lose access to one of the only outlets left where people seem to be willing to think out loud. I think the level of moderation here (you) generally does a good job of striking the proper balance between free thought and destructive chaos, and I can appreciate the difficulty of handling any borderline cases.

machina_ex_deus 4y ago

I think HN moderation is intolerant of people with more assertive form of expression. It's pretty sad because people here come from different cultures and different personalities, and some people just naturally express themselves more assertively, cynically or provocatively. Some people prefer hypocrisy and softened words and respect for others, while others prefer getting a clear point across, and using cynicism and exaggeration are valid tools for that. Looking at previous posts of this person, he's clearly naturally cynical. Does that merit ban? Should all cynical people walk on the tips of their toes in HN to avoid "flamebait" ? In the name of protecting those easily offendable, we're becoming intolerant of those who don't understand subtle nuances. Or those that just have to respond. Or those coming from cultures with naturally less tact. This poster didn't even open up the problematic subject himself but responded to someone else.

throwawaylinux 4y ago
> I think HN moderation is intolerant of people with more assertive form of expression. It absolutely isn't when that expression is Correct™. You can blather about Brexit horrible and its voters are deluded or selfish, but you have to tread carefully if you voice the opinion that the EU is not roses or Brexit is the better alternative. You must be very polite and non-confrontational about it. Same as covid. You could rant and rave about anybody questioning the ever-changing official narrative and denounce them as science deniers and selfish, and that was pretty well tolerated. Asking any questions or expressing any doubt would have to be done extremely carefully again. Same as any topic. This is better than most places I've found though. At least you can be in the minority, question authority, and have "wrong" opinions about many (not all) things. You are definitely not afforded the same privilege as others though. Which shouldn't be a surprise, you have to learn to read a room, especially a room in somebody else's house.
- Aloha 4y ago
  Brexit being bad does not make the EU good and leaving it a notable decline. If nothing else (ignoring short term economic issues) it reduces the soft power that the UK had notably. The EU is not without a great many issues, notably the weakness is the central banking mechanisms of the EU/Euro - and the Euro in inseparable from the EU, and tbh, kinda endemic of the issues with the EU. It's an almost country, its missing the accountability of a full country, but still has some sovereign powers. I think the flaws in the EU are fixable, but not without making it look more like a democratic supranational government. However, for all of the EU's flaws - the UK is hurting now, largely because of Brexit - who knows, in 50 years it may turn out for the best. But I honestly suspect not - only time will tell.
  - throwawaylinux 4y ago
    I didn't want to debate the merits of Brexit, I'm not from there or the EU nor have studied the subject closely so it's not my place. I do think it's reasonable that you have those opinions of it and want to put them forward to debate and convince and learn. But I also think people holding opposite opinions, that Brexit didn't reduce soft-power or that a reduction in soft power is not a real problem, or that the EU is not fixable, or that it's not worth staying in the EU hoping it will be fixed, or that UK is not hurting now because of Brexit, or whatever -- are also opinions that a reasonable person might have and put forward in good faith. I do think the banned comment was the tired, tiresome kind of thing that people who feel passionately seem to find a way to shoehorn into discussions where they are off topic or add nothing substantive. And I think the comment they replied to was as well. I don't really see much difference, other than the nature of the opinion. Yes the banned poster did address their parent specifically, but... really the parent put out their opinion about a bunch of things, if that is substantive then it should invite questions or disagreements so addressing them on the topic of their opinions is appropriate, surely.