6 ms·

Zed follows up on the search for Matt

42 points by astrec 18y ago

qhoxie 18y ago
You did the right thing Zed. Glad you at least have answers now.
- qwph 18y ago
  I agree.
- ROFISH 18y ago
  Yeah, because Zed now has a name and number of someone's ass to personally kick. I eagerly await a follow-up, YouTube video, and plausible movie deal. :D
- bk 18y ago
  I agree. Especially since there's a socially conditioned stigma against falling for a false alarm when trying to help. It seems to be seen as a display of hysteria on the helper's part. That's why most people act "too cool" to actually do something - better not risk that precious reputation. Better a few false positives than a false negative.
  - kirubakaran 18y ago
    This was three years ago: http://kirubakaran.blogspot.com/2005/12/interesting-evening.html http://kirubakaran.blogspot.com/2005/12/interesting-evening.... I still feel stupid for calling 911 (that I acted like some granny). You are right on about the stigma.
    - ks 18y ago
      If you didn't do anything, you would have felt far worse. You did the right thing.
Sam_Odio 18y ago
The most interesting part of that post is Zed's commentary on reddit. As an early reddit user I found it blunt, but it struck a chord none-the-less. I think it's time to move the discussion from how reddit's different to how news.yc is going to prevent the same thing from happening here. It's clear (at least to me) that comment voting just promotes group-think. It seems we have a few stop-gap solutions (i.e. moderation) but nothing yet that's practical, elegant, and effective.
- unalone 18y ago
  Hacker News keeps surprising me. Months ago I thought it was going downhill, but it seems to have stabilized a bit since then. Reddit still has stuff that's worth reading, but damn, you have to search now. It's a pain.
- astrec 18y ago
  Not 100% convinced about comment voting promoting group-think: I try (and sometimes fail) to vote on comment quality even if I disagree with the points made. The discussion in this place is routinely exceptional in quality, and it seems to me the few occasions on which the case for group-think could be made could equally be explained by the fact that commenters sourced from such a narrow demographic are likely to do a fair bit of agreeing. That said, I'd be aghast if we ever descended to the level of reddit.
  - whacked_new 18y ago
    This is itself the problem. There isn't any defined purpose for the up/down arrow, so people just interpret it with their own vague standards and act accordingly. Everybody will be able to make a case for their up/down votes and everybody will be right, but will also reveal very little, because you simply can't tell what the vote was on. If you gather a bunch of crazies and give them voting buttons, the result will still be crazy. If you take away voting buttons from sensible people, the discussion will still be sensible. The problem isn't that the voting promotes group-think. It's the entire premise of voting that is skewed. Once every while you can find a comment here, downvoted to oblivion, simply for stating an unpopular opinion. Before the issue of group-think comes into mind, you'd have to wonder what the down-voters are thinking, and further, how the way they think influences the overall discussion here.
cousin_it 18y ago
Manipulation by pity is the single human quality I hate the most. It might be possible to build a complete personality on avoiding to manipulate others, ever; I'm trying to.
- gruseom 18y ago
  I think the will to eschew manipulation of others is an admirable one. You've reminded me of something I've been thinking about lately and feel like writing down. If you try to eliminate something from your personality in a straightforward way, what tends to happen is that it goes underground. You haven't gotten rid of X; you've fragmented your consciousness so that you're no longer aware of X, which makes you think X is gone when really it's continuing to operate. And X can work a lot more mischief now that it's autonomous from the part of you that wants to regulate it. A straightforward example is the religious fanatic who suppresses his "demonic" impulses. We all know what such people tend to really be like. Perhaps a more meaningful example for this forum is the kind of person who wants to overcome his fear by motivating himself to think he's not afraid and by executing certain actions to prove it. The trouble with doing this naively is that you can end up not with an absence of fear, but with unconscious fear, which continues to prevent you from doing things, only in ways you can't explain. Of course, literature is replete with examples of this dynamic. The bottom line is that you can't minimize X in yourself by trying to eliminate it. It seems that a better strategy is to stay aware of X as it is happening. That way X and the part of you that is against X remain in the same field and there is a possibility of integration. So, counterintuitively, if you really want to minimize something in yourself you have to accept it.
  - cousin_it 18y ago
    > If you try to eliminate something from your personality in a straightforward way, what tends to happen is that it goes underground. This sounds neat, but is it true? Executing actions really does drive away fear, moreover it seems to be the only effective way to overcome fear. If you tried it, you know. :-) Quitting smoking or stopping manipulative behavior cold turkey really does work, while the gradual approach doesn't work and is self-deceptive. I have decisively and successfully driven away certain qualities, and other people agree when asked that I no longer have them.
deleted 18y ago
[deleted]
josefresco 18y ago
Maddox called, he wants his writing style back.
- deleted 18y ago
  [deleted]
- raganwald 18y ago
  Did you read the commentary about they types of comments his post attracted on reddit? Or some of the commentary about this phenomenon here? Do you think your comment is more typical of HN or of reddit?
Hexstream 18y ago
FTA: "No, they don’t even try to mask their collective stupidity." This kind of behavior, being conscious of and proud of one's own mediocrity, is something that has baffled me time and time again. Can someone please explain the thought process that leads to this? "People usually expect a certain level of decency and self-respect and I'm a unique, cool rebel so I'll do the opposite"?

42 points by astrec 18y ago

qhoxie 18y ago

You did the right thing Zed. Glad you at least have answers now.

qwph 18y ago
I agree.
ROFISH 18y ago
Yeah, because Zed now has a name and number of someone's ass to personally kick. I eagerly await a follow-up, YouTube video, and plausible movie deal. :D
bk 18y ago
I agree. Especially since there's a socially conditioned stigma against falling for a false alarm when trying to help. It seems to be seen as a display of hysteria on the helper's part. That's why most people act "too cool" to actually do something - better not risk that precious reputation. Better a few false positives than a false negative.
- kirubakaran 18y ago
  This was three years ago: http://kirubakaran.blogspot.com/2005/12/interesting-evening.html http://kirubakaran.blogspot.com/2005/12/interesting-evening.... I still feel stupid for calling 911 (that I acted like some granny). You are right on about the stigma.
  - ks 18y ago
    If you didn't do anything, you would have felt far worse. You did the right thing.

Sam_Odio 18y ago

The most interesting part of that post is Zed's commentary on reddit. As an early reddit user I found it blunt, but it struck a chord none-the-less. I think it's time to move the discussion from how reddit's different to how news.yc is going to prevent the same thing from happening here. It's clear (at least to me) that comment voting just promotes group-think. It seems we have a few stop-gap solutions (i.e. moderation) but nothing yet that's practical, elegant, and effective.

unalone 18y ago
Hacker News keeps surprising me. Months ago I thought it was going downhill, but it seems to have stabilized a bit since then. Reddit still has stuff that's worth reading, but damn, you have to search now. It's a pain.
astrec 18y ago
Not 100% convinced about comment voting promoting group-think: I try (and sometimes fail) to vote on comment quality even if I disagree with the points made. The discussion in this place is routinely exceptional in quality, and it seems to me the few occasions on which the case for group-think could be made could equally be explained by the fact that commenters sourced from such a narrow demographic are likely to do a fair bit of agreeing. That said, I'd be aghast if we ever descended to the level of reddit.
- whacked_new 18y ago
  This is itself the problem. There isn't any defined purpose for the up/down arrow, so people just interpret it with their own vague standards and act accordingly. Everybody will be able to make a case for their up/down votes and everybody will be right, but will also reveal very little, because you simply can't tell what the vote was on. If you gather a bunch of crazies and give them voting buttons, the result will still be crazy. If you take away voting buttons from sensible people, the discussion will still be sensible. The problem isn't that the voting promotes group-think. It's the entire premise of voting that is skewed. Once every while you can find a comment here, downvoted to oblivion, simply for stating an unpopular opinion. Before the issue of group-think comes into mind, you'd have to wonder what the down-voters are thinking, and further, how the way they think influences the overall discussion here.

cousin_it 18y ago

Manipulation by pity is the single human quality I hate the most. It might be possible to build a complete personality on avoiding to manipulate others, ever; I'm trying to.

gruseom 18y ago
I think the will to eschew manipulation of others is an admirable one. You've reminded me of something I've been thinking about lately and feel like writing down. If you try to eliminate something from your personality in a straightforward way, what tends to happen is that it goes underground. You haven't gotten rid of X; you've fragmented your consciousness so that you're no longer aware of X, which makes you think X is gone when really it's continuing to operate. And X can work a lot more mischief now that it's autonomous from the part of you that wants to regulate it. A straightforward example is the religious fanatic who suppresses his "demonic" impulses. We all know what such people tend to really be like. Perhaps a more meaningful example for this forum is the kind of person who wants to overcome his fear by motivating himself to think he's not afraid and by executing certain actions to prove it. The trouble with doing this naively is that you can end up not with an absence of fear, but with unconscious fear, which continues to prevent you from doing things, only in ways you can't explain. Of course, literature is replete with examples of this dynamic. The bottom line is that you can't minimize X in yourself by trying to eliminate it. It seems that a better strategy is to stay aware of X as it is happening. That way X and the part of you that is against X remain in the same field and there is a possibility of integration. So, counterintuitively, if you really want to minimize something in yourself you have to accept it.
- cousin_it 18y ago
  > If you try to eliminate something from your personality in a straightforward way, what tends to happen is that it goes underground. This sounds neat, but is it true? Executing actions really does drive away fear, moreover it seems to be the only effective way to overcome fear. If you tried it, you know. :-) Quitting smoking or stopping manipulative behavior cold turkey really does work, while the gradual approach doesn't work and is self-deceptive. I have decisively and successfully driven away certain qualities, and other people agree when asked that I no longer have them.

deleted 18y ago

[deleted]

josefresco 18y ago

Maddox called, he wants his writing style back.

deleted 18y ago
[deleted]
raganwald 18y ago
Did you read the commentary about they types of comments his post attracted on reddit? Or some of the commentary about this phenomenon here? Do you think your comment is more typical of HN or of reddit?

Hexstream 18y ago

FTA: "No, they don’t even try to mask their collective stupidity." This kind of behavior, being conscious of and proud of one's own mediocrity, is something that has baffled me time and time again. Can someone please explain the thought process that leads to this? "People usually expect a certain level of decency and self-respect and I'm a unique, cool rebel so I'll do the opposite"?