4 ms·

I agree. Maybe to flag, you should have to click 'hide' first, and be angry enough that you then go and look it up in the hidden list to flag it. It's short s

by ajb 2y ago

I agree. Maybe to flag, you should have to click 'hide' first, and be angry enough that you then go and look it up in the hidden list to flag it. It's short sighted, when this kind of thing comes banging on their door, they won't be able to 'flag' it away.

infecto 2y ago
Just based solely on comments alone you can see why these posts get flagged. It’s against the spirit of HN to house ideological battlegrounds regardless of whatever the truth or right side is. Edit: I don’t have the exact theory of the inner workings but always assumed that’s why vouching existed. You are more effectively weighting the opinion of higher karma folks to help drive the site. You could always vouch for something but with each cycle it might down weight it as that’s a signal the story is too contentious. You probably lose some valuable discussions but also get to cut many more that are worthless.
- mystraline 2y ago
  You're trying to attribute reason and justification. You have 0 insight into why however many people clicked the 'flag' button. In fact, there's no way to even enter a reason. I'm looking at the simple fact that flagging/disappearing an article with 150 comments by a select minority is abhorrent in of itself. (Doubly ridiculous is the disappeared article is about disappearing people.) Again, if you're too triggered about a subject matter, close the tab. Turns out, that's a really simple operation.
  - infecto 2y ago
    Please don’t project, no one’s triggered, at least not me. This kind of language is why these threads get flagged. The comments are low-signal rehashes without new value and just fuel tribal conflict. People can vouch, but that may still lead to moderation.
    - ModernMech 2y ago
      > Please don’t project.... This kind of language is why these threads get flagged. As the person who you responded to noted, you don't know why other people flagged a thread. None of us do. That you believe it's due to tribal battles is your own projection. What's not a projection is that many people chose to have a discussion on a topic despite the flag, and that's interesting, so maybe worth discussing.
      - infecto 2y ago
        I am one of the flaggers. I do have some idea and that’s why I said don’t project ideas. This is the exact reason. I am simply saying these stories usually miss the mark for HN, you are welcome to vouch for it.
        ModernMech 2y ago
        You said: "This kind of language is why these threads get flagged. " But you don't know that, so the claim is projection. As a flagger, you only know why you flagged, but don't know why anyone else flagged. There are many alternative reasons any given story, political or otherwise, could be flagged. People can be engaging in tribalism as their reason for flagging. What's worse: engaging in discussion that is along tribal lines, or hiding discussion for tribal reasons? Which does more damage to this community? Since we can't know why a given story is flagged, a better discussion might be: given that many people in the community want to discuss a topic despite a flag, how can HN better support those community members? We have one signal: a low-fidelity binary flag we can't know the reason for and how many people voted for it; and another signal: the discussion, a high fidelity signal we can look into and see all kinds of useful discourse. So clearly your claim that these topics are not wanted on HN is false, given the community involvement in these topics. Maybe there is some tribalism, but generally it's not at all like reddit, and I find those discussion insightful. Maybe you don't, and that's fine. But why does that mean you get veto over the many people who want to have those discussions here? Why can't we support those discussions, that again people here want to have, in a way that doesn't involve treating the topic as verboten? Because you keep saying these topics miss the HN mark, yet the community is continually interested in these topics. So maybe it's the guidelines miss the mark and need updating to meet the community where it's at.

by ajb 2y ago

infecto 2y ago

Just based solely on comments alone you can see why these posts get flagged. It’s against the spirit of HN to house ideological battlegrounds regardless of whatever the truth or right side is. Edit: I don’t have the exact theory of the inner workings but always assumed that’s why vouching existed. You are more effectively weighting the opinion of higher karma folks to help drive the site. You could always vouch for something but with each cycle it might down weight it as that’s a signal the story is too contentious. You probably lose some valuable discussions but also get to cut many more that are worthless.

mystraline 2y ago
You're trying to attribute reason and justification. You have 0 insight into why however many people clicked the 'flag' button. In fact, there's no way to even enter a reason. I'm looking at the simple fact that flagging/disappearing an article with 150 comments by a select minority is abhorrent in of itself. (Doubly ridiculous is the disappeared article is about disappearing people.) Again, if you're too triggered about a subject matter, close the tab. Turns out, that's a really simple operation.
- infecto 2y ago
  Please don’t project, no one’s triggered, at least not me. This kind of language is why these threads get flagged. The comments are low-signal rehashes without new value and just fuel tribal conflict. People can vouch, but that may still lead to moderation.
  - ModernMech 2y ago
    > Please don’t project.... This kind of language is why these threads get flagged. As the person who you responded to noted, you don't know why other people flagged a thread. None of us do. That you believe it's due to tribal battles is your own projection. What's not a projection is that many people chose to have a discussion on a topic despite the flag, and that's interesting, so maybe worth discussing.
    - infecto 2y ago
      I am one of the flaggers. I do have some idea and that’s why I said don’t project ideas. This is the exact reason. I am simply saying these stories usually miss the mark for HN, you are welcome to vouch for it.
      - ModernMech 2y ago
        You said: "This kind of language is why these threads get flagged. " But you don't know that, so the claim is projection. As a flagger, you only know why you flagged, but don't know why anyone else flagged. There are many alternative reasons any given story, political or otherwise, could be flagged. People can be engaging in tribalism as their reason for flagging. What's worse: engaging in discussion that is along tribal lines, or hiding discussion for tribal reasons? Which does more damage to this community? Since we can't know why a given story is flagged, a better discussion might be: given that many people in the community want to discuss a topic despite a flag, how can HN better support those community members? We have one signal: a low-fidelity binary flag we can't know the reason for and how many people voted for it; and another signal: the discussion, a high fidelity signal we can look into and see all kinds of useful discourse. So clearly your claim that these topics are not wanted on HN is false, given the community involvement in these topics. Maybe there is some tribalism, but generally it's not at all like reddit, and I find those discussion insightful. Maybe you don't, and that's fine. But why does that mean you get veto over the many people who want to have those discussions here? Why can't we support those discussions, that again people here want to have, in a way that doesn't involve treating the topic as verboten? Because you keep saying these topics miss the HN mark, yet the community is continually interested in these topics. So maybe it's the guidelines miss the mark and need updating to meet the community where it's at.