4 ms·

I'm not sure about that, but a lot of it depends on what you consider to be "dissenting opinions".

roflyear 2y ago
I agree it depends on the definition. Quite honestly my vibe, and really that is all it is for any of us discussing this, is pretty much anything more aggressive than my comment above (or even including my comment above, once more people read it). I definitely DO NOT mean clear hate speech, etc.. that's not my point at all.
- alwa 2y ago
  I, for one, come here in substantial part for the norms against aggression and toward calm substantive discussion. Shouting matches and rhetorical posturing are exhausting. There are places for that—most places online, anymore; this is not one of them.
- mac-mc 2y ago
  So, do you mean you don't like tone policing? You can say pretty much anything as long as the tone stays intellectual and doesn't go into brain damage politics, harassment, or conspiracy zone where it's being banned because it's off-topic and, frankly, exhausting and unproductive.
  - roflyear 2y ago
    No, and if you read the tone of my posts and even the tone of dang (and others) here I would argue that my tone is not out of line and arguably more polite. But I'm the one that is rate limited in this thread and prevented from interacting with people politely.
kccqzy 2y ago
For example, having the opinion that manifest V3 is good for users is an opinion that will not thrive on HN. Personally I hope Tom will bring new moderation policies that will truly let unpopular opinions thrive, but I don't have high hopes here since this is just an announcement of a new moderator, not an announcement of new moderation policies.
- otterley 2y ago
  "Not thriv[ing]" is not the same as being quashed. Minority opinions don't always rise to the popularity or acceptance level of majority opinions, and that's OK.
  - kccqzy 2y ago
    Let us not use the word "thrive" or "quash" to avoid misunderstandings. To rephrase, I hope that on HN even minority opinions have reasonable rebuttals. Unfortunately what currently happens is people flag minority opinions with no discussion.
    - otterley 2y ago
      I agree that that's not a best practice. It's not what the downvote mechanism was intended for.
      - tracker1 2y ago
        In a way, iirc, it really is. It's as much a "I disagree" as it is "I don't like this". That said, I would like to see more people actually respond in addition to a downvote. I don't think that's generally a function of the moderators though.
      - MrMcCall 2y ago
        Flagging is used by people who have no rebuttal but are mad. That's why I have only flagged one or two posts, ever, but not because I was mad, but because the comment was just plain beyond the pale. And my posts against portaying violent rape in film got flagged. Make it make sense, because I understand the failure of this system because systems are my trade-in-craft.
        jraph 2y ago
        Nope, sometimes I would have a rebuttal but flagging is the better option (constructive discussion is hard without mutual respect, and/or don't feed the troll). Or, the comment doesn't even have anything to refute, it's just disrespectful or it's spam, or both. I have flagged a few comments but I'm rarely mad. And if one is mad because of a disrespectful comment, the flagging is probably appropriate too.

I agree it depends on the definition. Quite honestly my vibe, and really that is all it is for any of us discussing this, is pretty much anything more aggressive than my comment above (or even including my comment above, once more people read it). I definitely DO NOT mean clear hate speech, etc.. that's not my point at all.

alwa 2y ago
I, for one, come here in substantial part for the norms against aggression and toward calm substantive discussion. Shouting matches and rhetorical posturing are exhausting. There are places for that—most places online, anymore; this is not one of them.
mac-mc 2y ago
So, do you mean you don't like tone policing? You can say pretty much anything as long as the tone stays intellectual and doesn't go into brain damage politics, harassment, or conspiracy zone where it's being banned because it's off-topic and, frankly, exhausting and unproductive.
- roflyear 2y ago
  No, and if you read the tone of my posts and even the tone of dang (and others) here I would argue that my tone is not out of line and arguably more polite. But I'm the one that is rate limited in this thread and prevented from interacting with people politely.

kccqzy 2y ago

For example, having the opinion that manifest V3 is good for users is an opinion that will not thrive on HN. Personally I hope Tom will bring new moderation policies that will truly let unpopular opinions thrive, but I don't have high hopes here since this is just an announcement of a new moderator, not an announcement of new moderation policies.

otterley 2y ago
"Not thriv[ing]" is not the same as being quashed. Minority opinions don't always rise to the popularity or acceptance level of majority opinions, and that's OK.
- kccqzy 2y ago
  Let us not use the word "thrive" or "quash" to avoid misunderstandings. To rephrase, I hope that on HN even minority opinions have reasonable rebuttals. Unfortunately what currently happens is people flag minority opinions with no discussion.
  - otterley 2y ago
    I agree that that's not a best practice. It's not what the downvote mechanism was intended for.
    - tracker1 2y ago
      In a way, iirc, it really is. It's as much a "I disagree" as it is "I don't like this". That said, I would like to see more people actually respond in addition to a downvote. I don't think that's generally a function of the moderators though.
    - MrMcCall 2y ago
      Flagging is used by people who have no rebuttal but are mad. That's why I have only flagged one or two posts, ever, but not because I was mad, but because the comment was just plain beyond the pale. And my posts against portaying violent rape in film got flagged. Make it make sense, because I understand the failure of this system because systems are my trade-in-craft.
      - jraph 2y ago
        Nope, sometimes I would have a rebuttal but flagging is the better option (constructive discussion is hard without mutual respect, and/or don't feed the troll). Or, the comment doesn't even have anything to refute, it's just disrespectful or it's spam, or both. I have flagged a few comments but I'm rarely mad. And if one is mad because of a disrespectful comment, the flagging is probably appropriate too.