3 ms·

A surprisingly large number of people here are sensitive when articles or opinions don’t agree with them. The flag and downvote are their usual weapons of choi

A surprisingly large number of people here are sensitive when articles or opinions don’t agree with them. The flag and downvote are their usual weapons of choice. It’s odd to blow off “politics” that impact trade and business on a site crawling with people who, you know, want to get rich in trade and business.

ggm 2y ago
I'd far rather get into a conversation. What tends to happen is a lot of ad hom and probably I'm as guilty as the next person. I do think that there are some key coding labels used by "one side" to refer to "the other side" -on my side we tend to reach to the F word (not F#, nor FP this time) a lot. On the other, the W word and Social Justice Warrior comes up a lot. The last person I had a cogent discussion about this stuff with was interesting. This is years ago, before the first Trump presidency. Very strongly aligned to organized religion (Catholic) having come out of a wierd pentecostal movement and lost contact with family. Very much "destroy the joint" and so backing Trump, yet hated Vance with a vengeance as "not really from west virginia and a scumbag" -I wonder what he makes of things now? So many contradictory pressures! Nice guy. I like talking to people even when I don't agree. I tend to flag stories which bore me (which may be bad behaviour) or which look to be seeking to monetize from low effort deliverable. It would have to be an utterly repellant top level line of reasoning for me to want to flag it. Something arguing for CSAM or Race theory. I avoid the trans debates like the plague, and CoC discussions tend to be there these days but I wouldn't flag one just because its about a CoC issue.
- walterbell 2y ago
  Organized flagging by competing groups on HN will continue until someone publishes a data analysis not only proving the organization, but reverse engineering and naming the cliques via graph analysis. There is signal within HN-flagged articles, for an enterprising LLM.

ggm 2y ago

I'd far rather get into a conversation. What tends to happen is a lot of ad hom and probably I'm as guilty as the next person. I do think that there are some key coding labels used by "one side" to refer to "the other side" -on my side we tend to reach to the F word (not F#, nor FP this time) a lot. On the other, the W word and Social Justice Warrior comes up a lot. The last person I had a cogent discussion about this stuff with was interesting. This is years ago, before the first Trump presidency. Very strongly aligned to organized religion (Catholic) having come out of a wierd pentecostal movement and lost contact with family. Very much "destroy the joint" and so backing Trump, yet hated Vance with a vengeance as "not really from west virginia and a scumbag" -I wonder what he makes of things now? So many contradictory pressures! Nice guy. I like talking to people even when I don't agree. I tend to flag stories which bore me (which may be bad behaviour) or which look to be seeking to monetize from low effort deliverable. It would have to be an utterly repellant top level line of reasoning for me to want to flag it. Something arguing for CSAM or Race theory. I avoid the trans debates like the plague, and CoC discussions tend to be there these days but I wouldn't flag one just because its about a CoC issue.

walterbell 2y ago
Organized flagging by competing groups on HN will continue until someone publishes a data analysis not only proving the organization, but reverse engineering and naming the cliques via graph analysis. There is signal within HN-flagged articles, for an enterprising LLM.