5 ms·

I think 'common sense' can be deeply deceptive in high-dudgeon situations and this is is pretty high on the dudgeonmeter. There's tremendous fatigue with repeti

by pvg 2y ago

I think 'common sense' can be deeply deceptive in high-dudgeon situations and this is is pretty high on the dudgeonmeter. There's tremendous fatigue with repetitive current events stories and their generally low-quality threads and that was there long before the latest storyburst. Here's an example: When Trump was shot, flaggers nuked pretty much every instance of the story off the front page. It wasn't corrected till the next day. Do you think it's likely Nazi sympathizers did that? Or ideologues of some kind? It's hard to imagine what kind. Much more likely, just people thinking 'oh god, not more of this shit, not here', whatever their other views. The other thing is, you're indirectly/unintentionally saying dang has been straight up lying to us about the nature of these flags (i.e. that there's no obvious evidence of brigading, etc) for days. I'm sure he makes mistakes, has biases conscious and unconscious like the rest of us but I don't think he presiding over the place perched on a throne of lies.

Tadpole9181 2y ago
I don't really understand how you're misconstrueing what I'm saying. I didn't say there's brigading. I didn't say dang is biased or "on a throne of lies". I said he's clearly explained how the system works and it's operating as intended, but that the intended system has flaws. And that the topic invokes bad faith flagging, which leverages those flaws. I admit I was shitty to them a week or two ago calling them "complicit" for the effect of the flaws, but that was just me being shitty and I have not said that HN mods are doing something wrong here. I just defended them all repeatedly? Let me be excruciatingly clear: Dang and the team have done a great job all things considered, despite what disappointments I outlined above. It's hard, unappreciated work, and their communication has been helpful. WRT to the attempted parallel: some submissions are flagged for good reason. Hell, this post should be flagged because it's a duplicate. But I'm not fool enough to not understand the context of these discussions. And, once again, the context is that a saluting, meming gamer Nazi billionaire is achieving the libertarian dream dismantling the US government using the fascist dream of zero oversight executive overreach using AI wielding, racist tech bros fresh out of college. Seriously, I couldn't think of a better targeted demographic to abuse the flagging system to suppress any negative coverage of this being bad in our community. If your goal here is to convince me that this whole situation has NOT been exacerbated by those abusing their flag privilege, you should honestly just move on. Not even dang has insight into the mens rea of a flag and I've had the displeasure of many of my peers being this particular brand of nasty.
- pvg 2y ago
  dang has insight into the mens rea Neither do you though? It's just not at all obvious to me, other than 'I think it's nazis because nazis are bad' (and nazis are, without question, really bad - no argument there), why one ought to assume that this is nazis, but every other time it happens (nearly daily) it's something else. you should honestly just move on done.
  - Tadpole9181 2y ago
    The fact you reduce everything I say to absurdity or some complete falsehood is against HN rules too, if we're being pedantic. Maybe you could stop? I don't think it's authoritarians "because Nazis are bad". I think it's authoritarians because it's a story about authoritarians having authoritarians do bad authoritarian things and there are a disproportionate ratio of authoritarians or authoritarian sympathizers on this forum (and our careers) and this action is blatantly inline with the behavior of the petty authoritarians who are trying to seize power and I'm not an idiot? And, no, this isn't exclusive to this scenario. And, shockingly, there are more than two scenarios on this planet. You're not being clever, you're being dismissive and rude.
    - _DeadFred_ 2y ago
      I think the takeaway is we have our answer, this isn't the site for the kind of open bay area adjacent discussion you/others assumed it was. It has been clearly pointed out it has always been a very curated discussion, we just didn't notice/understand. This is how flagging works here (you/me wrongly assumed flagging was required to meet your/our definition of good faith).
computerthings 2y ago
> If the reasons are benign and not to suppress awareness and discussion -- in short, not people thinking themselves the lords of others -- then nobody would have a problem with people opting out with something like "ignore thread flags" option. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42933217 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42933217 what gives? easy way to put the money where the mouth is, no takers, ever. > I'm sure he makes mistakes, has biases conscious and unconscious like the rest of us but I don't think he presiding over the place perched on a throne of lies. It doesn't matter. Just like the identity or motivation of the people doing the flagging doesn't matter. This is what it actually is, and HN is one of the places to discuss issues like https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42979187 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42979187 -- and that was all fine and well before SV got into bed with fascism, after all. Attracting people who are curious and passionate about technology (and its impact on the world) was a welcome thing, in between the YC job ads and whatnot. Such stories about a young Kremlin "maverick" would be read and discussed with much interest. But when people have even more expertise, are likely to know of more related things, then suddenly it's off-topic? Hah. I'd say the opposite is the obviously the case: this is where push comes to shove and a lot of lip service flies away like chaff in the wind. > just people thinking 'oh god, not more of this shit, not here', whatever their other views. And how do you square the deluge of all sorts of sophistry, the posters of which usually don't reply to corrections, doing mental gymnastics to claim there is nothing to see here, talking about "the far left" constantly and all that? They're just what we see, but the rest of the iceberg is "most likely" of some entirely different material? Maybe, maybe not. People's reason from being unhelpful range from bad motivations to weakness, because saying "oh no not more of this" is just that. There is literally a "hide" button right next to "flag". That's what you do when you don't want to see something. I see a lot of stuff I don't care for and I would NEVER think of making it impossible for other people to discuss it. And whenever one of those "most likely" people says that that they flagged it because they don't want to see it, not once did they respond to my question why others shouldn't be able to discuss it, either. One tried something extremely handwavey and then didn't respond when asked what that actually is supposed to mean. That's a clear signal to me, it's pretty undiluted even.
- pvg 2y ago
  From your linked comment: who never followed up when I challenge them. That one seems really straightforward - people don't owe you receipts for their views or explanations for their motivations. The aspirational goal of the place is conversation, not interrogation.
tptacek 2y ago
It's dudgeonometer.
- pvg 2y ago
  El dudgeonino, if you're into that whole brevity thing.

by pvg 2y ago

Tadpole9181 2y ago

I don't really understand how you're misconstrueing what I'm saying. I didn't say there's brigading. I didn't say dang is biased or "on a throne of lies". I said he's clearly explained how the system works and it's operating as intended, but that the intended system has flaws. And that the topic invokes bad faith flagging, which leverages those flaws. I admit I was shitty to them a week or two ago calling them "complicit" for the effect of the flaws, but that was just me being shitty and I have not said that HN mods are doing something wrong here. I just defended them all repeatedly? Let me be excruciatingly clear: Dang and the team have done a great job all things considered, despite what disappointments I outlined above. It's hard, unappreciated work, and their communication has been helpful. WRT to the attempted parallel: some submissions are flagged for good reason. Hell, this post should be flagged because it's a duplicate. But I'm not fool enough to not understand the context of these discussions. And, once again, the context is that a saluting, meming gamer Nazi billionaire is achieving the libertarian dream dismantling the US government using the fascist dream of zero oversight executive overreach using AI wielding, racist tech bros fresh out of college. Seriously, I couldn't think of a better targeted demographic to abuse the flagging system to suppress any negative coverage of this being bad in our community. If your goal here is to convince me that this whole situation has NOT been exacerbated by those abusing their flag privilege, you should honestly just move on. Not even dang has insight into the mens rea of a flag and I've had the displeasure of many of my peers being this particular brand of nasty.

pvg 2y ago
dang has insight into the mens rea Neither do you though? It's just not at all obvious to me, other than 'I think it's nazis because nazis are bad' (and nazis are, without question, really bad - no argument there), why one ought to assume that this is nazis, but every other time it happens (nearly daily) it's something else. you should honestly just move on done.
- Tadpole9181 2y ago
  The fact you reduce everything I say to absurdity or some complete falsehood is against HN rules too, if we're being pedantic. Maybe you could stop? I don't think it's authoritarians "because Nazis are bad". I think it's authoritarians because it's a story about authoritarians having authoritarians do bad authoritarian things and there are a disproportionate ratio of authoritarians or authoritarian sympathizers on this forum (and our careers) and this action is blatantly inline with the behavior of the petty authoritarians who are trying to seize power and I'm not an idiot? And, no, this isn't exclusive to this scenario. And, shockingly, there are more than two scenarios on this planet. You're not being clever, you're being dismissive and rude.
  - _DeadFred_ 2y ago
    I think the takeaway is we have our answer, this isn't the site for the kind of open bay area adjacent discussion you/others assumed it was. It has been clearly pointed out it has always been a very curated discussion, we just didn't notice/understand. This is how flagging works here (you/me wrongly assumed flagging was required to meet your/our definition of good faith).

computerthings 2y ago

> If the reasons are benign and not to suppress awareness and discussion -- in short, not people thinking themselves the lords of others -- then nobody would have a problem with people opting out with something like "ignore thread flags" option. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42933217 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42933217 what gives? easy way to put the money where the mouth is, no takers, ever. > I'm sure he makes mistakes, has biases conscious and unconscious like the rest of us but I don't think he presiding over the place perched on a throne of lies. It doesn't matter. Just like the identity or motivation of the people doing the flagging doesn't matter. This is what it actually is, and HN is one of the places to discuss issues like https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42979187 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42979187 -- and that was all fine and well before SV got into bed with fascism, after all. Attracting people who are curious and passionate about technology (and its impact on the world) was a welcome thing, in between the YC job ads and whatnot. Such stories about a young Kremlin "maverick" would be read and discussed with much interest. But when people have even more expertise, are likely to know of more related things, then suddenly it's off-topic? Hah. I'd say the opposite is the obviously the case: this is where push comes to shove and a lot of lip service flies away like chaff in the wind. > just people thinking 'oh god, not more of this shit, not here', whatever their other views. And how do you square the deluge of all sorts of sophistry, the posters of which usually don't reply to corrections, doing mental gymnastics to claim there is nothing to see here, talking about "the far left" constantly and all that? They're just what we see, but the rest of the iceberg is "most likely" of some entirely different material? Maybe, maybe not. People's reason from being unhelpful range from bad motivations to weakness, because saying "oh no not more of this" is just that. There is literally a "hide" button right next to "flag". That's what you do when you don't want to see something. I see a lot of stuff I don't care for and I would NEVER think of making it impossible for other people to discuss it. And whenever one of those "most likely" people says that that they flagged it because they don't want to see it, not once did they respond to my question why others shouldn't be able to discuss it, either. One tried something extremely handwavey and then didn't respond when asked what that actually is supposed to mean. That's a clear signal to me, it's pretty undiluted even.

pvg 2y ago
From your linked comment: who never followed up when I challenge them. That one seems really straightforward - people don't owe you receipts for their views or explanations for their motivations. The aspirational goal of the place is conversation, not interrogation.

tptacek 2y ago

It's dudgeonometer.

pvg 2y ago
El dudgeonino, if you're into that whole brevity thing.