3 ms·

You usually nuke stories that are political. I'm not being critical, it clearly leads to significant improvement over similar sites. What makes this one differ

You usually nuke stories that are political. I'm not being critical, it clearly leads to significant improvement over similar sites. What makes this one different? When I see a headline like this, I usually assume I managed to see it before you did, and if I refresh the page that it will probably disappear. So again, and without accusation, what's different? Bad things happen all over the world, nearly constantly or at least it seems to a cynic like myself. Some of those bad things seem... if not fixable, then at least not intractable. Those stories don't seem welcome here though. Surely the situation in Israel and Palestine is as intractable as any, and so much more than most.

dang 3y ago
Users usually flag them, but yes, moderators often downweight them too—and then there are times that we turn off the flags. The answer to your question goes like this: (1) some stories with political overlap are on topic (see https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=political%20overlap%20by:dang); https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... (2) we try to be careful about which those are, so the site doesn't go down in flames; (3) I think it follows from HN's core principle (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=curiosity%20optimiz%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...) that we have to allow at least some discussion of this topic—to suppress it altogether would contradict the intended spirit of HN; and (4) I've explained (or tried to) the sense in which this particular story can be on topic for HN, in my other comments in this thread. If you or anyone reads that material and still have a question that isn't answered there, I can take a crack at it. Just please understand that the answer may or may not be satisfying, because even if we agree on the principles, different people interpret and draw the lines differently. The important thing for HN moderation is the principles, though, not the individual calls.
- bitcurious 3y ago
  I got the impression that stories about the Ukraine/Russia was have been consistently suppressed, including stories about the tech side of the war - drones, hacking, etc. Is this impression mistaken?
  - dang 3y ago
    It was similar. Users flagged many posts, and we applied the same principles as I've described in this thread, as best we could. That involved turning off flags on certain stories. Unfortunately, the threads did not go well. That experience is one reason why I'm taking a different approach in the current thread. We're trying to learn over time how to support some discussion (but not too much) of these difficult topics, while remaining within the intended spirit of the site.
    - baybal2 3y ago
      [dead]
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
    - Log_out_ 3y ago
      Could these threads be saved by a different post weighting model? Throw away downvoted posts, but also discard controversial up voted posts? Or detect bipartisan voting and discard those votes?
      - dang 3y ago
        I do think there's room to experiment with that, yes.
- EvgeniyZh 3y ago
  I skim through headers of 100+ vote submission daily, and since 7.10 I haven't seen anything about this conflict until recently, and now this is second in last week. Since the discussion usually tend to be broad topic rather than specific link, this feels a lot (I left a single comment last time and was flooded by responses). Both entries are talking negatively about Israel (I think specifically Al Jazeera is not very good source being affiliated with Qatari government) so it feels kind of biased; of course it may just reflect HN users opinion, but the comments were more balanced?
  - dang 3y ago
    Yes - the reason is that it slowly started to dawn on me that we can't avoid this topic altogether and still remain within the intended spirit of this site. That took a while, and it's probably better to have waited in any case, because otherwise the odds of reflective rather than reflexive responses (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=reflective%20reflex%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...) would have been even lower than they currently are. Basically everything in how we run HN is an attempt to optimize for the core principle: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=curiosity%20optimiz%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor.... I know it's not at all obvious how this topic can be within that spirit, but it's also not obvious how avoiding the topic can be within that spirit, so it feels to me like we have to try. I'm trying to support that in this thread a lot more actively than I usually do. (Btw, this has the side effect of paying much less attention to what else is on HN's front page, or happening in comments elsewhere. Usually I make the opposite tradeoff.)
    - s5300 3y ago
      >> the reason is that it slowly started to dawn on me that we can't avoid this topic altogether and still remain within the intended spirit of this site. Pleasantly surprised to see you state/admit this - thanks dang <3
    - briantakita 3y ago
      > reflective rather than reflexive responses I understand where you are coming from. In my experience, the reflective response is often a steel manning of one's own position. This often involves framing, as in using phrases that are agreeable in another context into the author's position. The error I see is both sides of the argument constraining the scope of their discourse to only use information that supports their position. Lies by omission & more often than not, lying to oneself first. In my experience, having tools to expand the contextual scope is vital, if not the definition, to supporting intellectual curiosity. That's where we seem to disagree on flagging & even downvoting. I think being able to somehow deconstruct comments to extract the insightful (& indicative) as signal over the noise in the comment would also be useful. It's open ended on how that would be done but it's worth exploring IMO. I think tools that improve expression, understanding, & evaluation of context are critical to improving cohesion across humanity. I am busy writing open source libraries with the intent of creating apps to support contextual expression & understanding. I hope others create & collaborate in building these sorts of tools (tech, social, spiritual, etc) because it may be one of the most important advances for healing our many divides. --- > That's where we seem to disagree on flagging & even downvoting. I think the author's intent of expression is often not heard with the same context. So the meaning of what was spoken & what was heard is different. Often one applies their judgements to what was heard while not grasping the context of what was spoken. Have you done any analysis on who downvotes/flags, on what they downvote/flag, & how often?
gjs278 3y ago
[dead]
neonsunset 3y ago
There are two possibilities: - This submission is being kept up out of personal agenda (in which case, fair, we can vote with out feet and voices on other platforms) - This submission is being kept up out of genuine belief. That would constitute an adjective used to describe a person who inadvertently helps their enemies (which Iranian proxies are). On another note, the article contents - most of it is just poor conditions and rough treatment, which is something that happens to you if you rape and massacre civilians. If you want to know what is actual torture, look up what happens in russia-occupied regions of Ukraine. That's torture, and it happens on a scale far surpassing anything that happened or can happen on such a small piece of land as Gaza strip.
- dappermanneke 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - 15457345234 3y ago
    [flagged]

dang 3y ago

Users usually flag them, but yes, moderators often downweight them too—and then there are times that we turn off the flags. The answer to your question goes like this: (1) some stories with political overlap are on topic (see https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=political%20overlap%20by:dang); https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... (2) we try to be careful about which those are, so the site doesn't go down in flames; (3) I think it follows from HN's core principle (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=curiosity%20optimiz%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...) that we have to allow at least some discussion of this topic—to suppress it altogether would contradict the intended spirit of HN; and (4) I've explained (or tried to) the sense in which this particular story can be on topic for HN, in my other comments in this thread. If you or anyone reads that material and still have a question that isn't answered there, I can take a crack at it. Just please understand that the answer may or may not be satisfying, because even if we agree on the principles, different people interpret and draw the lines differently. The important thing for HN moderation is the principles, though, not the individual calls.

bitcurious 3y ago
I got the impression that stories about the Ukraine/Russia was have been consistently suppressed, including stories about the tech side of the war - drones, hacking, etc. Is this impression mistaken?
- dang 3y ago
  It was similar. Users flagged many posts, and we applied the same principles as I've described in this thread, as best we could. That involved turning off flags on certain stories. Unfortunately, the threads did not go well. That experience is one reason why I'm taking a different approach in the current thread. We're trying to learn over time how to support some discussion (but not too much) of these difficult topics, while remaining within the intended spirit of the site.
  - baybal2 3y ago
    [dead]
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - Log_out_ 3y ago
    Could these threads be saved by a different post weighting model? Throw away downvoted posts, but also discard controversial up voted posts? Or detect bipartisan voting and discard those votes?
    - dang 3y ago
      I do think there's room to experiment with that, yes.
EvgeniyZh 3y ago
I skim through headers of 100+ vote submission daily, and since 7.10 I haven't seen anything about this conflict until recently, and now this is second in last week. Since the discussion usually tend to be broad topic rather than specific link, this feels a lot (I left a single comment last time and was flooded by responses). Both entries are talking negatively about Israel (I think specifically Al Jazeera is not very good source being affiliated with Qatari government) so it feels kind of biased; of course it may just reflect HN users opinion, but the comments were more balanced?
- dang 3y ago
  Yes - the reason is that it slowly started to dawn on me that we can't avoid this topic altogether and still remain within the intended spirit of this site. That took a while, and it's probably better to have waited in any case, because otherwise the odds of reflective rather than reflexive responses (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=reflective%20reflex%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...) would have been even lower than they currently are. Basically everything in how we run HN is an attempt to optimize for the core principle: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=curiosity%20optimiz%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor.... I know it's not at all obvious how this topic can be within that spirit, but it's also not obvious how avoiding the topic can be within that spirit, so it feels to me like we have to try. I'm trying to support that in this thread a lot more actively than I usually do. (Btw, this has the side effect of paying much less attention to what else is on HN's front page, or happening in comments elsewhere. Usually I make the opposite tradeoff.)
  - s5300 3y ago
    >> the reason is that it slowly started to dawn on me that we can't avoid this topic altogether and still remain within the intended spirit of this site. Pleasantly surprised to see you state/admit this - thanks dang <3
  - briantakita 3y ago
    > reflective rather than reflexive responses I understand where you are coming from. In my experience, the reflective response is often a steel manning of one's own position. This often involves framing, as in using phrases that are agreeable in another context into the author's position. The error I see is both sides of the argument constraining the scope of their discourse to only use information that supports their position. Lies by omission & more often than not, lying to oneself first. In my experience, having tools to expand the contextual scope is vital, if not the definition, to supporting intellectual curiosity. That's where we seem to disagree on flagging & even downvoting. I think being able to somehow deconstruct comments to extract the insightful (& indicative) as signal over the noise in the comment would also be useful. It's open ended on how that would be done but it's worth exploring IMO. I think tools that improve expression, understanding, & evaluation of context are critical to improving cohesion across humanity. I am busy writing open source libraries with the intent of creating apps to support contextual expression & understanding. I hope others create & collaborate in building these sorts of tools (tech, social, spiritual, etc) because it may be one of the most important advances for healing our many divides. --- > That's where we seem to disagree on flagging & even downvoting. I think the author's intent of expression is often not heard with the same context. So the meaning of what was spoken & what was heard is different. Often one applies their judgements to what was heard while not grasping the context of what was spoken. Have you done any analysis on who downvotes/flags, on what they downvote/flag, & how often?

gjs278 3y ago

[dead]

neonsunset 3y ago

There are two possibilities: - This submission is being kept up out of personal agenda (in which case, fair, we can vote with out feet and voices on other platforms) - This submission is being kept up out of genuine belief. That would constitute an adjective used to describe a person who inadvertently helps their enemies (which Iranian proxies are). On another note, the article contents - most of it is just poor conditions and rough treatment, which is something that happens to you if you rape and massacre civilians. If you want to know what is actual torture, look up what happens in russia-occupied regions of Ukraine. That's torture, and it happens on a scale far surpassing anything that happened or can happen on such a small piece of land as Gaza strip.

dappermanneke 3y ago
[flagged]
- 15457345234 3y ago
  [flagged]