4 ms·

Thanks for the link - I wouldn't have seen that thread had you not brought it up. However, are you implying the original story is being manually supressed? Coul

Thanks for the link - I wouldn't have seen that thread had you not brought it up. However, are you implying the original story is being manually supressed? Could it be the discussion there got too heated? There are other factors that determine ranking, see https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html

javajosh 3y ago
YC is a Reddit investor, and dang hasn't chimed in connecting the threads, and the other thread was removed from the homepage. It's suggestive but it doesn't prove anything. The guidelines say that HN moderates its own properties less, but that may not always be true, especially pre IPO.
- echelon 3y ago
  Does YC still own any stake in Reddit? Didn't Conde Nast acquire 100% back in the day?
- mustacheemperor 3y ago
  I don’t think it’s suggestive. This came up in an earlier thread[0] and he said it set off the flamewar detector, which likely happened again with this one. He probably just hasn’t seen the threads to merge them yet, it’s nighttime. Thanks for running the asylum dang. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36142285#36143711 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36142285#36143711
- Kiro 3y ago
  If I was dang I would ban you for talking smack.
  - brynjolf 3y ago
    Aren't you the coolest kid in the playground, or the guy on the sideline cheering on the coolest guy. Actually just staring in hoping someone would notice you. Yeah I think is it he last one.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - javajosh 3y ago
    I believe you. But hear me when I say: you would be wrong for doing so. It's one of HN's strengths that it doesn't just not punish contrarian views, but actively encourages them. It's an attitude that resonates strongly with me, and a value that is rare and precious. And, I was careful to say "suggestive", which is an appropriately weak statement. What's more, is we see evidence of how views like yours, to crush dissent by force, leads to weakness. Every strongman that surrounds himself with yes-men are weakened by the practice. They become detached from reality, coddled by delusion, and ultimately less effective in the world. That's not to say that all criticism is good - it's not. Plenty of bad faith criticism exists, too: rooted in lies, or envy, or sadism, designed to harm, to demoralize, to weaken. In some cases because someone is paying you, and often because you don't really know what you're doing. Sometimes because you're having a bad day. How does one distinguish one type of input from another? I think 90% of the time it's easy - when someone speaks in absolutes, when they demonstrate no self-restraint, when they go down the path of "everything bad said about you is true, everything good is false", they have become a zealous enemy, and yes, in that case I think I would seek to ban them. We would all pursue defamation cases against anyone who would attack us in this way (but don't because it's just too bloody expensive). With my comment, was I doing this? No, clearly not. I may be factually wrong, but I don't think so and I wrote the comment in good faith; it accurately reflects the appearance of a situation. And I know from experience how easily people can grant themselves exceptions to their own rules when it is convenient, and I see it as a gesture of respect to point out the appearance of it. They can take it, and I have faith that they won't punish me for saying so. It feels like...safety. And you would take it away, not just from me, but from others who share these values!

javajosh 3y ago

YC is a Reddit investor, and dang hasn't chimed in connecting the threads, and the other thread was removed from the homepage. It's suggestive but it doesn't prove anything. The guidelines say that HN moderates its own properties less, but that may not always be true, especially pre IPO.

echelon 3y ago
Does YC still own any stake in Reddit? Didn't Conde Nast acquire 100% back in the day?
mustacheemperor 3y ago
I don’t think it’s suggestive. This came up in an earlier thread[0] and he said it set off the flamewar detector, which likely happened again with this one. He probably just hasn’t seen the threads to merge them yet, it’s nighttime. Thanks for running the asylum dang. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36142285#36143711 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36142285#36143711
Kiro 3y ago
If I was dang I would ban you for talking smack.
- brynjolf 3y ago
  Aren't you the coolest kid in the playground, or the guy on the sideline cheering on the coolest guy. Actually just staring in hoping someone would notice you. Yeah I think is it he last one.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- javajosh 3y ago
  I believe you. But hear me when I say: you would be wrong for doing so. It's one of HN's strengths that it doesn't just not punish contrarian views, but actively encourages them. It's an attitude that resonates strongly with me, and a value that is rare and precious. And, I was careful to say "suggestive", which is an appropriately weak statement. What's more, is we see evidence of how views like yours, to crush dissent by force, leads to weakness. Every strongman that surrounds himself with yes-men are weakened by the practice. They become detached from reality, coddled by delusion, and ultimately less effective in the world. That's not to say that all criticism is good - it's not. Plenty of bad faith criticism exists, too: rooted in lies, or envy, or sadism, designed to harm, to demoralize, to weaken. In some cases because someone is paying you, and often because you don't really know what you're doing. Sometimes because you're having a bad day. How does one distinguish one type of input from another? I think 90% of the time it's easy - when someone speaks in absolutes, when they demonstrate no self-restraint, when they go down the path of "everything bad said about you is true, everything good is false", they have become a zealous enemy, and yes, in that case I think I would seek to ban them. We would all pursue defamation cases against anyone who would attack us in this way (but don't because it's just too bloody expensive). With my comment, was I doing this? No, clearly not. I may be factually wrong, but I don't think so and I wrote the comment in good faith; it accurately reflects the appearance of a situation. And I know from experience how easily people can grant themselves exceptions to their own rules when it is convenient, and I see it as a gesture of respect to point out the appearance of it. They can take it, and I have faith that they won't punish me for saying so. It feels like...safety. And you would take it away, not just from me, but from others who share these values!