6 ms·

A consequence of having a system of flagging is that dang can avoid having to do any work by having users remove other users' comments, keeping the site in one

by veave 3y ago

A consequence of having a system of flagging is that dang can avoid having to do any work by having users remove other users' comments, keeping the site in one side of the political spectrum. (Just to be clear, I don't think he particularly cares which side wins, as long as it allows him to avoid any responsibility)

maxbond 3y ago
I propose as an experiment, you go make an offensive left-wing comment on a relevant thread (maybe "ACAB" or "eat the rich"), and see if it gets flagged and downvoted. I read a bunch of right-wing comments on HN (including ones making good arguments), the reports of left bias on HN are greatly overstated.
- defrost 3y ago
  They're effectively contentless comments of no merit. Any slogan yelling should get downvoted by HN standards regardless of partisan bias. An Eat the Rich comment that includes a quality recipe, however, should be rewarded with tolerance if not upvotes.
  - DonHopkins 3y ago
    If God didn't mean for poor people to eat rich people, he wouldn't have made them of meat. [1] The Cannibal Cookbook: Human meat recipes from around the world https://www.amazon.nl/-/en/Nico-Claux/dp/B08SGR2W6M https://www.amazon.nl/-/en/Nico-Claux/dp/B08SGR2W6M [1] Paraphrased from The Reluctant Cannibal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjAHw2DEBgw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjAHw2DEBgw
  - maxbond 3y ago
    I can't say I agree, if someone made a high effort post arguing for eating the rich, I personally would still flag it because I flag all calls to violence, whether they are low effort or not. (Some people say "eat the rich" to mean "redistribute wealth through taxation," if I could tell that's what they meant I probably wouldn't flag it, other people uh, don't. Maybe the recipe you referenced is a policy proposal, let me know if I've misread you.)
    - defrost 3y ago
      How is advocating for eating the rich a call for violence though? Are you assuming it's a call to kill them rather than a plea to not waste the protein? The thing many people fail to realise about the Fore people in PNG was that their cannibalism was a mortuary rite of reverance for highly valued in group members that weren't killed for sustenance. I can quote a paper: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2581657/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2581657/ or simply say I learnt that first hand 40+ years back as child tagging along on supply runs with Mike Alpers (see Author list). Now .. given you might have gained a snippet of new infomation, how do you feel about upvoting this comment about eating high value members of society?
      - maxbond 3y ago
        I wasn't born yesterday.
        DonHopkins 3y ago
        I love babies! ...I just can't eat a whole one.
        defrost 3y ago
        Hmm - a self evident non sequitur that fails to address a real point about the actual world and the assumptions made by people about both violence and cannabalism. That's a poor comment from yourself- I'd hoped for better.
        maxbond 3y ago
        If you'd like a higher quality response, sophistry and performative disappointment isn't the way to get it. I'm not going to give a serious detailed response to an unserious comment, I'm going to find a better use for my time.
        defrost 3y ago
        I don't follow you at all I'm afraid. I'm completely serious about the facts here: * You don't have to kill people in order to eat them, * I've had cannibals as babysitters in PNG as a child, * I'm much the same age as Mike Alpers own children who I know from my days in university. etc. You claim to not be engaged with such topics because <<violence>> and I've quite accurately pointed out that violence isn't a neccesity here. Why, exactly, are you having a little tantrum here?
- veave 3y ago
  You are assuming that the topics I mentioned would be posted in the shape of short slogans, but they could be posted as long comments of several paragraphs and be flagged all the same. Also there is no left bias. There is a progressive bias. Not exactly the same
  - maxbond 3y ago
    That's not really what I meant re slogans, they were more examples of convenience. But I could have expressed myself better there. When I see political comments get flagged, it's usually because they said something explicitly offensive or insulting. They'll sign of with an edit attacking downvoters, say something insulting about their political opponents, or reference a conspiracy theory. That will reliably get you flagged regardless of the position you are advocating.
Dylan16807 3y ago
People still talk about these things all the fucking time. They're debated on worldwide TV broadcasts.

by veave 3y ago

maxbond 3y ago

I propose as an experiment, you go make an offensive left-wing comment on a relevant thread (maybe "ACAB" or "eat the rich"), and see if it gets flagged and downvoted. I read a bunch of right-wing comments on HN (including ones making good arguments), the reports of left bias on HN are greatly overstated.

defrost 3y ago
They're effectively contentless comments of no merit. Any slogan yelling should get downvoted by HN standards regardless of partisan bias. An Eat the Rich comment that includes a quality recipe, however, should be rewarded with tolerance if not upvotes.
- DonHopkins 3y ago
  If God didn't mean for poor people to eat rich people, he wouldn't have made them of meat. [1] The Cannibal Cookbook: Human meat recipes from around the world https://www.amazon.nl/-/en/Nico-Claux/dp/B08SGR2W6M https://www.amazon.nl/-/en/Nico-Claux/dp/B08SGR2W6M [1] Paraphrased from The Reluctant Cannibal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjAHw2DEBgw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjAHw2DEBgw
- maxbond 3y ago
  I can't say I agree, if someone made a high effort post arguing for eating the rich, I personally would still flag it because I flag all calls to violence, whether they are low effort or not. (Some people say "eat the rich" to mean "redistribute wealth through taxation," if I could tell that's what they meant I probably wouldn't flag it, other people uh, don't. Maybe the recipe you referenced is a policy proposal, let me know if I've misread you.)
  - defrost 3y ago
    How is advocating for eating the rich a call for violence though? Are you assuming it's a call to kill them rather than a plea to not waste the protein? The thing many people fail to realise about the Fore people in PNG was that their cannibalism was a mortuary rite of reverance for highly valued in group members that weren't killed for sustenance. I can quote a paper: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2581657/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2581657/ or simply say I learnt that first hand 40+ years back as child tagging along on supply runs with Mike Alpers (see Author list). Now .. given you might have gained a snippet of new infomation, how do you feel about upvoting this comment about eating high value members of society?
    - maxbond 3y ago
      I wasn't born yesterday.
      - DonHopkins 3y ago
        I love babies! ...I just can't eat a whole one.
      - defrost 3y ago
        Hmm - a self evident non sequitur that fails to address a real point about the actual world and the assumptions made by people about both violence and cannabalism. That's a poor comment from yourself- I'd hoped for better.
        maxbond 3y ago
        If you'd like a higher quality response, sophistry and performative disappointment isn't the way to get it. I'm not going to give a serious detailed response to an unserious comment, I'm going to find a better use for my time.
        defrost 3y ago
        I don't follow you at all I'm afraid. I'm completely serious about the facts here: * You don't have to kill people in order to eat them, * I've had cannibals as babysitters in PNG as a child, * I'm much the same age as Mike Alpers own children who I know from my days in university. etc. You claim to not be engaged with such topics because <<violence>> and I've quite accurately pointed out that violence isn't a neccesity here. Why, exactly, are you having a little tantrum here?
veave 3y ago
You are assuming that the topics I mentioned would be posted in the shape of short slogans, but they could be posted as long comments of several paragraphs and be flagged all the same. Also there is no left bias. There is a progressive bias. Not exactly the same
- maxbond 3y ago
  That's not really what I meant re slogans, they were more examples of convenience. But I could have expressed myself better there. When I see political comments get flagged, it's usually because they said something explicitly offensive or insulting. They'll sign of with an edit attacking downvoters, say something insulting about their political opponents, or reference a conspiracy theory. That will reliably get you flagged regardless of the position you are advocating.

Dylan16807 3y ago

People still talk about these things all the fucking time. They're debated on worldwide TV broadcasts.