4 ms·

FWIW, I agree with the comment that was flagged to death. What did they say that was so bad it needed to be dead?

sickofparadox 2y ago
If you click on the timestamp of comments that are dead and you have enough karma(?) you can vouch for them and they sometimes come back.
- _yb2s 2y ago
  Thanks for pointing this out, I've seen a lot of flagged dead comments come back and wondered how that happens. It seems the one in question now has as well.
tossandthrow 2y ago
It does not seem to be flagged, but down voted. Personally I wold also down vote it as it is not very well founded. A change of the wording would probably go a long way not to be down-voted and also some support for the ideas. Furthermore, it represents a sentiment and a direction I think most people on HN do not agree with. As a European I also do not not agree that direction to solve the issue.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
_yb2s 2y ago
Same here... it was also pretty similar to the idea the article was about. When I've talked about YIMBY ideas of allowing more housing to be built on here in the past, I also usually get downvoted and get a lot of angry replies. My take is there are some active YIMBY groups in SF in particular, and for some reason they are strongly and actively disliked by a lot of the local HN crowd- but they generally don't seem to want to say anything about it or explain why. I'm not informed enough to know what is actually going on, as I don't live there, but have been accused of being part of specific groups in specific places that I know nothing about when I've posted.
InitialLastName 2y ago
They are shadowbanned; I couldn't get far enough back in their history to see why, but it was probably for the constant hostility and partisan flamewarring. Also though, most of the issues they raised (e.g. zoning, permitting, fees, property and sales taxes, demographic sales restrictions [I'm gonna need a cite on that one]) are municipal and state government concerns and not particularly relevant or actionable at the federal level.
rimunroe 2y ago
I don't know if this is why, but it's not a constructive comment. Just saying something people will agree with shouldn't be a reason to post here. A comment should add something to the discussion. There's no substantial justification in their comment for the their preferences. Just voicing your policy preferences doesn't add anything to the discussion other than flame bait.
doctoboggan 2y ago
I am guessing you and the other poster didn't read the full article, because reducing bureaucracy is a part of this proposal: > Cut Red Tape and Needless Bureaucracy. These plans will build on the Biden-Harris Administration's efforts to cut red tape and enable more home building to bring down housing costs-which have advanced record levels of new home construction. Pushing this forward also means streamlining permitting processes and reviews, including for transit-oriented and conversion development, so builders canget homes on the market sooner and bring down costs.

If you click on the timestamp of comments that are dead and you have enough karma(?) you can vouch for them and they sometimes come back.

_yb2s 2y ago
Thanks for pointing this out, I've seen a lot of flagged dead comments come back and wondered how that happens. It seems the one in question now has as well.

tossandthrow 2y ago

It does not seem to be flagged, but down voted. Personally I wold also down vote it as it is not very well founded. A change of the wording would probably go a long way not to be down-voted and also some support for the ideas. Furthermore, it represents a sentiment and a direction I think most people on HN do not agree with. As a European I also do not not agree that direction to solve the issue.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

_yb2s 2y ago

Same here... it was also pretty similar to the idea the article was about. When I've talked about YIMBY ideas of allowing more housing to be built on here in the past, I also usually get downvoted and get a lot of angry replies. My take is there are some active YIMBY groups in SF in particular, and for some reason they are strongly and actively disliked by a lot of the local HN crowd- but they generally don't seem to want to say anything about it or explain why. I'm not informed enough to know what is actually going on, as I don't live there, but have been accused of being part of specific groups in specific places that I know nothing about when I've posted.

InitialLastName 2y ago

They are shadowbanned; I couldn't get far enough back in their history to see why, but it was probably for the constant hostility and partisan flamewarring. Also though, most of the issues they raised (e.g. zoning, permitting, fees, property and sales taxes, demographic sales restrictions [I'm gonna need a cite on that one]) are municipal and state government concerns and not particularly relevant or actionable at the federal level.

rimunroe 2y ago

I don't know if this is why, but it's not a constructive comment. Just saying something people will agree with shouldn't be a reason to post here. A comment should add something to the discussion. There's no substantial justification in their comment for the their preferences. Just voicing your policy preferences doesn't add anything to the discussion other than flame bait.

doctoboggan 2y ago

I am guessing you and the other poster didn't read the full article, because reducing bureaucracy is a part of this proposal: > Cut Red Tape and Needless Bureaucracy. These plans will build on the Biden-Harris Administration's efforts to cut red tape and enable more home building to bring down housing costs-which have advanced record levels of new home construction. Pushing this forward also means streamlining permitting processes and reviews, including for transit-oriented and conversion development, so builders canget homes on the market sooner and bring down costs.