3 ms·
Right. But the comments thread for the referenced paper got flagged. It’s not really clear why. (Perhaps dang can clarify?) Maybe that it got a bit political.
by dent9876543 2y ago
Right. But the comments thread for the referenced paper got flagged.
It’s not really clear why. (Perhaps dang can clarify?) Maybe that it got a bit political.
But it is a shame, because trust in science has taken a bit of a hammering in recent times. And although it is easy to slip into partisan rhetoric, I rather think it’s the duty of forums like this to entertain that as a kind of cost of doing business. (Of course, the business being showing that despite inevitable political distraction, science as an institution is trustworthy.)
Anyway. I expect I’ll lose that argument… :-)
- defrost 2y agoFlagged, not dead: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40571940 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40571940 It's clear why, if you know where to look- there are more comments than votes and (more to the point) there are a lot of flagged and flagged-dead comments. Long time HN users with points get to [flag] posts and it only takes a few (likely less than 5) to move a post to flagged - what triggers flagging by users tends to be contraversial topics appearing for the N'th time and lots of bickering in comments. When it comes to topics such as COVID, Lableaks, Isreal-Gaza, Climate Change, Trans-<something> posts get flagged more often than not - and near as I can see it's usually because these things have been hashed over many times in the past, there's generally not a lot of movement on opinions held by opposing parties, and threads often rapidly devolve into entrenched opposing camps firing at each other.
- t0bia_s 2y agoIm not sure if flagging those topics didn't escalate echo chambers even more.