My guess is the closest thing to coordinated "psyops" that HN has ever seen is when an aspiring "founder" asks a group of his buddies to upvote his post and mak

My guess is the closest thing to coordinated "psyops" that HN has ever seen is when an aspiring "founder" asks a group of his buddies to upvote his post and make accounts to give praise or ask softball questions (which I have seen). But it feels like in every controversial discussion there are accusations of being a shill or astroturfer or whatever in the pay of the enemy. I've been occasionally accused of this myself. I think it's just a lazy substitute for debate rather than an accusation that's actually been thought out or is even believed in any way. I have no insight into how psyops are run, but I find the idea of an agent springing into action because a HN article critical of or praising X has just come along. Who knows I guess...