4 ms·

Isn't describing this comment as "fulmination" snarky, which is itself a violation of the guidelines? It's at least a shallow dismissal of their opinion, for s

• dang 4y ago
  Interpretations inevitably differ, but I don't think those comments come close to matching your descriptions and I can't imagine that most users would either. They seem tediously neutral to me.
  • JimmieMcnulty 4y ago
    Isn’t that the problem? You see your own shallow dismissals as tediously neutral, but others as violations of the guidelines. For example, in this comment here that I’m replying to, you caveat what you say, and yet you don’t caveat any of the comments I’ve cited as ”your opinion”, despite them being the same value judgements of someone else’s writing. “Please stop <value judgement of comment>.” Is about as textbook of a “shallow dismissal” as one could get. You don’t apply the same rules to yourself, so there’s zero reason or incentive to follow those rules for the rest of us. Edit: Hey, within an hour of writing this comment, I'm now slowbanned (a thing you at one point claimed was removed from HN). So I guess you don't like dissent either, dang? Edit2: Since I can't respond (you muted me), the community doesn't evaluate your activity objectively; you're worshipped, and aren't give feedback that represents a reflection of your actual behavior, so an appeal to the masses here isn't an effective argument. The community may disagree with you, but it's actively detrimental to say so, and will apparently create negative repercussions for the folks who do speak out, creating a "chilling effect", preventing you from getting the "bloodbath" you apparently think would be necessary for you to change your behavior. Additionally, the fact that you've made it harder for me to interact on HN as a result of this conversation is an indication that everything I'm suggesting here is even more true than I initially thought.
    • dang 4y ago
      Users here are extremely quick to push back if we do something they find objectionable. That's in fact how the moderation practices have evolved in the first place—by intense operant conditioning: if you do X and immediately get swarmed by wasps, you're less likely to do X in the future. Slowbanning and rate limiting are two different things. Your account is rate limited. That's standard practice in a number of cases, including (a) when an account is posting too many low-quality comments too quickly and/or getting involved in flamewars, and/or (b) there's reason to believe that an account is the latest incarnation of a user whom we've banned several times in the past. The bar for moderation penalties is a lot lower when we seem to be dealing with a serial abuser. Edit: I deleted an earlier response to you because I didn't have time to finish it (I wanted to respond to the bit about 'slowbanning'). If I had seen that you'd already responded to it in your parent comment, I wouldn't have deleted it. The original text was: We've already established that you interpret those comments very differently than I do. The question then would be: is there any way to I post that sort of moderation comment all the time—tens of thousands of them by now. If the community agreed with you, we'd never hear the end of it; in fact, it would be a bloodbath. So I don't think the community agrees with you.
      • JimmieMcnulty 4y ago
        > Users here are extremely quick to push back if we do something they find objectionable. This is simply not true; you act like you're the only person who's been around here for 15 years. There is simply no mechanism to organize any kind of meaningful pushback. Additionally, by virtue of the fact that you already dismiss the people (like me, with your declarative statements about the nature of my comments) who give you this pushback, it's not clear you'd even notice. Just looking at your history I can see a number of folks who fundamentally disagree with how you give feedback, but I guess to you that's not "valid" pushback? I only feel safe to give you this pushback in the first place because I know your moderation efforts are ineffective to how I prefer to use HN. Otherwise I'd be afraid of getting actioned against, as you aren't a rational actor when it comes to taking actions against users on HN. Further, you have this habit of making declarative refutory statements such as these without justification or elaboration. That's pretty much the exact definition of "shallow dismissal". For example, a "serial abuser" might actually just be someone you disagree with who you then take action against as part of that disagreement, but the way you operate is clearly without that possibility in mind. Edit: What[0] would[1] you[2] call[3] these[4] comments[5], if[6] not[7] pushback[8][9]? Or do these not count because you dislike these users? I'm quite sure, in your mind, you've dismissed these complaints as invalid, and I think that's an error. Also no, none of these are me. Also also not for nothing but 'tptacek seems to spend an inordinate amount of time defending your work in the form of replies to complaints, and I personally think that's a massive waste of his time, but c'est la vie... [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32857054 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32857054 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32831746 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32831746 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32801256 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32801256 [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32782368 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32782368 [4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32777165 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32777165 [5] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32777628 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32777628 [6] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32780934 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32780934 [7] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32773572 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32773572 [8] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32776460 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32776460 [9] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32772466 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32772466