4 ms·

I appreciate you dang and the culture you are trying to cultivate, but I think in a genocide civility politics are inappropriate. I'm jewish, and I am certain t

I appreciate you dang and the culture you are trying to cultivate, but I think in a genocide civility politics are inappropriate. I'm jewish, and I am certain that "raising questions" about whether jews should live or die or are intrinsically evil terrorists would not be allowed on this site. For balance, this should be accorded equally to palestinians, who are in fact being killed mercilessly in line for food by Israeli forces and US mercenaries. pg in fact has been loudly talking about the genocide, which I appreciate. https://x.com/paulg/status/1950180259636072737 https://x.com/paulg/status/1950180259636072737 I will try to be less flippant in my comments. Nonetheless, it is a lot of work to cut through genocidal lies that are often supported (at least in editorials if not in actual reporting) by the mainstream media. The north of Gaza has been nearly obliterated and still these guys get to cast aspersions justifying the annihilation of a people. Google recently updated images of northern Gaza: https://www.google.com/maps/@31.4956821,34.4752786,609m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDcyNy4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D https://www.google.com/maps/@31.4956821,34.4752786,609m/data...

dang 1y ago
> "raising questions" about whether jews should live or die or are intrinsically evil terrorists would not be allowed on this site. For balance, this should be accorded equally to palestinians What are examples of such comments not being flagged and/or moderated? I'd appreciate links. Such comments are unacceptable by any interpretation of HN's guidelines, and the only reason we wouldn't crack down on them (same as with antisemitic comments of course) is if we didn't see them. > I think in a genocide civility politics are inappropriate I'm not talking about civility and stopped using that word years ago. Shallow words like civility or politeness don't reflect how we think about moderation. (I listed a few past explanations about that below*, if anyone wants them.) What are we looking for? Not sure I can answer that better than I did in the GP comment. We want people to listen to each other, because of the two available options—listening and killing—only listening is compatible with the core value of the site. I know it's a provocation to use the word "killing" in this context, and obviously I mean it metaphorically, but I think it's accurate. When people stop listening and seek to destroy the other's argument/position/view, killing energy is the quality that shows up. I don't think it takes too much emotional self-awareness to feel this, nor too much self-honesty to admit it. That is the dynamic behind weaponized internet comments. It's easy to deny, because the genre itself is so trivial, and so are the weapons (snark, tropes, etc.). But one need only sense into the feeling level and it's no longer so trivial—in fact, it's all there. This explains the distinctive mix of rage and pain that flares up when one reads a comment fired against one's position, and also the distinctive mix of...let's call it righteousness and triumph that flares up when a comment is fired in favor of one's position. Perhaps it would be less provocative to use the word "war" rather than "killing" for the non-listening option, but I'm not sure that abstraction is beneficial in describing this. It creates distance from the reality inside ourselves, and room for denial and evasion. Regardless of what the best names are, we want the listening option, because the alternative is just more destruction. (Needless to say, I'm not talking about you here, I'm talking about all of us.) --- * Here are a few posts touching on how we stopped thinking in terms of 'civility'...lots more can be found in HN Search if anyone cares... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41571382 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41571382 (Sept 2024) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36394992 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36394992 (June 2023) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36244479 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36244479 (June 2023) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30315409 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30315409 (Feb 2022) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26427796 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26427796 (March 2021) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23033173 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23033173 (April 2020) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22713745 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22713745 (March 2020)

dang 1y ago

> "raising questions" about whether jews should live or die or are intrinsically evil terrorists would not be allowed on this site. For balance, this should be accorded equally to palestinians What are examples of such comments not being flagged and/or moderated? I'd appreciate links. Such comments are unacceptable by any interpretation of HN's guidelines, and the only reason we wouldn't crack down on them (same as with antisemitic comments of course) is if we didn't see them. > I think in a genocide civility politics are inappropriate I'm not talking about civility and stopped using that word years ago. Shallow words like civility or politeness don't reflect how we think about moderation. (I listed a few past explanations about that below*, if anyone wants them.) What are we looking for? Not sure I can answer that better than I did in the GP comment. We want people to listen to each other, because of the two available options—listening and killing—only listening is compatible with the core value of the site. I know it's a provocation to use the word "killing" in this context, and obviously I mean it metaphorically, but I think it's accurate. When people stop listening and seek to destroy the other's argument/position/view, killing energy is the quality that shows up. I don't think it takes too much emotional self-awareness to feel this, nor too much self-honesty to admit it. That is the dynamic behind weaponized internet comments. It's easy to deny, because the genre itself is so trivial, and so are the weapons (snark, tropes, etc.). But one need only sense into the feeling level and it's no longer so trivial—in fact, it's all there. This explains the distinctive mix of rage and pain that flares up when one reads a comment fired against one's position, and also the distinctive mix of...let's call it righteousness and triumph that flares up when a comment is fired in favor of one's position. Perhaps it would be less provocative to use the word "war" rather than "killing" for the non-listening option, but I'm not sure that abstraction is beneficial in describing this. It creates distance from the reality inside ourselves, and room for denial and evasion. Regardless of what the best names are, we want the listening option, because the alternative is just more destruction. (Needless to say, I'm not talking about you here, I'm talking about all of us.) --- * Here are a few posts touching on how we stopped thinking in terms of 'civility'...lots more can be found in HN Search if anyone cares... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41571382 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41571382 (Sept 2024) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36394992 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36394992 (June 2023) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36244479 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36244479 (June 2023) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30315409 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30315409 (Feb 2022) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26427796 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26427796 (March 2021) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23033173 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23033173 (April 2020) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22713745 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22713745 (March 2020)