3 ms·

Why is the list kept secret / not published? (it's the same thing) For one, I wonder if there are certain news sites that are legit but ideals don't align. Or

Why is the list kept secret / not published? (it's the same thing) For one, I wonder if there are certain news sites that are legit but ideals don't align. Or are they ALL spam sites? Who knows, we can't inspect it. Fight bad speech with more speech. Spam is the exception, but are they all just spam sites?

abathur 3y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37130234 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37130234
wnevets 3y ago
Probably so the offending sites don't realize they're being blocked.
- theultdev 3y ago
  pretty easy to see when they don't get traction / get flagged automatically. the only thing it really does is prevent others from seeing what's being censored.
  - tgv 3y ago
    I think they just don't check. They just post to as many sites as they can. It's high volume, low reward. HN also has a small readership with a limited interest, so it's not likely to be a spammer's top priority.
  - wnevets 3y ago
    > pretty easy to see when they don't get traction / get flagged automatically. or they may think the content itself is the problem and spend resources trying to tweak it. I think an analogous situation would be saying if the username/email is valid when there is a failed logged in attempt. Its a very minor thing but why give someone who is trying to abuse the system any help?
    - johnnyanmac 3y ago
      >or they may think the content itself is the problem and spend resources trying to tweak it. A spam site knows it's a spam site. It's already tweaking domains and thats why the list is so big. It's relatively easy to buy new domains. For the remaining 5-10% of legitimate sites I imagine HN isn't enough of a draw to care about tweaking content. They will save that level of curation for the Twitters, Facebooks, and maybe reddits in some cases. >I think an analogous situation would be saying if the username/email is valid when there is a failed logged in attempt. Its a very minor thing but why give someone who is trying to abuse the system any help? It does bring up the honest question of "how much do you inconvinence honest users in order to punish dishonest users"? And honestly it's a bit tiring to keep being assumed that I'm a dishonest user. If you trust me so little as to give an IQ test just to let me post a link (reducto ad absurdum), why would I bother as an honest user? Meanwhile the dishonest users will simply work around that or hire some cheap labor.
input_sh 3y ago
Cause spammers would buy a new domain and do the same thing again, as opposed to plausible denyability.
- theultdev 3y ago
  they can do that without the list. as soon as you see your post doesn't get traction, make a new domain, or have multiple in the first place.
  - input_sh 3y ago
    Have you ever checked /new? Not getting any traction is the default, not an exception. Plenty of submissions end up with no upvotes and very few clicks, hence plausible denyability.
  - abathur 3y ago
    The vast majority of all posts get ~0 traction. Even prolific posters of highly-upvoted links like todsacerdoti* are probably only getting around 1 in 10 to the frontpage at all, let alone for a meaningful period of time. * https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=todsacerdoti https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=todsacerdoti
weinzierl 3y ago
Because it invites people to game the system. There are plenty of free lists and they overlap significantly. I'm pretty sure their intersection is also very similar to the core of the HN list.
- theultdev 3y ago
  > Because it invites people to game the system. Please elaborate, how would they game the list? They can already see if a submission is throttled/flagged/etc.
  - idiotsecant 3y ago
    You can do A/B tests to figure out what sorts of behaviors ride the line of triggering bans vs what kinds of behaviors result in an outright ban. It lets you optimize for just-trash-enough to not get banned, which is not a desirable end state for users.
    - theultdev 3y ago
      That's a decent point, but I'm not sure if it's outweighed by the ability for users to discuss and validate the disallowed sources.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]

abathur 3y ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37130234 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37130234

wnevets 3y ago

Probably so the offending sites don't realize they're being blocked.

theultdev 3y ago
pretty easy to see when they don't get traction / get flagged automatically. the only thing it really does is prevent others from seeing what's being censored.
- tgv 3y ago
  I think they just don't check. They just post to as many sites as they can. It's high volume, low reward. HN also has a small readership with a limited interest, so it's not likely to be a spammer's top priority.
- wnevets 3y ago
  > pretty easy to see when they don't get traction / get flagged automatically. or they may think the content itself is the problem and spend resources trying to tweak it. I think an analogous situation would be saying if the username/email is valid when there is a failed logged in attempt. Its a very minor thing but why give someone who is trying to abuse the system any help?
  - johnnyanmac 3y ago
    >or they may think the content itself is the problem and spend resources trying to tweak it. A spam site knows it's a spam site. It's already tweaking domains and thats why the list is so big. It's relatively easy to buy new domains. For the remaining 5-10% of legitimate sites I imagine HN isn't enough of a draw to care about tweaking content. They will save that level of curation for the Twitters, Facebooks, and maybe reddits in some cases. >I think an analogous situation would be saying if the username/email is valid when there is a failed logged in attempt. Its a very minor thing but why give someone who is trying to abuse the system any help? It does bring up the honest question of "how much do you inconvinence honest users in order to punish dishonest users"? And honestly it's a bit tiring to keep being assumed that I'm a dishonest user. If you trust me so little as to give an IQ test just to let me post a link (reducto ad absurdum), why would I bother as an honest user? Meanwhile the dishonest users will simply work around that or hire some cheap labor.

input_sh 3y ago

Cause spammers would buy a new domain and do the same thing again, as opposed to plausible denyability.

theultdev 3y ago
they can do that without the list. as soon as you see your post doesn't get traction, make a new domain, or have multiple in the first place.
- input_sh 3y ago
  Have you ever checked /new? Not getting any traction is the default, not an exception. Plenty of submissions end up with no upvotes and very few clicks, hence plausible denyability.
- abathur 3y ago
  The vast majority of all posts get ~0 traction. Even prolific posters of highly-upvoted links like todsacerdoti* are probably only getting around 1 in 10 to the frontpage at all, let alone for a meaningful period of time. * https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=todsacerdoti https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=todsacerdoti

weinzierl 3y ago

Because it invites people to game the system. There are plenty of free lists and they overlap significantly. I'm pretty sure their intersection is also very similar to the core of the HN list.

theultdev 3y ago
> Because it invites people to game the system. Please elaborate, how would they game the list? They can already see if a submission is throttled/flagged/etc.
- idiotsecant 3y ago
  You can do A/B tests to figure out what sorts of behaviors ride the line of triggering bans vs what kinds of behaviors result in an outright ban. It lets you optimize for just-trash-enough to not get banned, which is not a desirable end state for users.
  - theultdev 3y ago
    That's a decent point, but I'm not sure if it's outweighed by the ability for users to discuss and validate the disallowed sources.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]