4 ms·

This was flagged in the last minute or two, I refreshed the page and it changed to flagged. Ridiculous.

by zemo 11mo ago

casenmgreen 11mo ago
I am concerned flag is being abused by State run actors.
- zemo 11mo ago
  That seems less likely than insufferably pedantic nerds screaming “off topic!!!! off topic!!!” whenever they see anything that makes them even slightly uncomfortable.
myrmidon 11mo ago
I don't think it is ridiculous to flag topics like this. The problem is that topics like this are incredibly hard to keep civil, and the "HN factor" ("prominent" people involved chiming in) is not really there, either. It also frequently ends up in the exact same repeated arguments (at best). Personally, I'm not flagging posts like this and I'm always very happy when the tone stays civil and the discussion interesting, but I can see why people would.
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
- LexiMax 11mo ago
  HN merely tries to keep up the appearance of being a place of civil debate and discussion. The bias comes out when the subject matter becomes in any way controversial. You can say some pretty horrendous things on here as long as you couch them in mealy-mouthed modest-proposal language, while there's almost no recourse for having a good faith rebuttable flagged or down-voted. In theory, the site moderators are supposed to be a check valve on this kind of abuse, but it's quite sobering to look at the age of some of the accounts who behave badly on HN and yet have somehow passed notice. I can only assume that the moderators are okay with the company they allow on the site, and I think it's worth taking a look around and asking yourself "Is this place _really_ worth contributing to?"
  - zemo 11mo ago
    indeed, this is a space that "prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice"
  - myrmidon 11mo ago
    > The bias comes out when the subject matter becomes in any way controversial. I do not agree on that. I think if you flip the perspective in topics like this to the other political side ("Chicago is finally doing something against illegal foreigners in the city") it would not be any less likely to get flagged. If I had to give a "best gess" for the aggregate political bias of HN, it would still be democrat/liberal/left, albeit less so than say, Reddit. > You can say some pretty horrendous things on here "Couching statements in soft language" is a significant part of keeping a polarizing discussion civil in my view, so that makes sense to me. What are those "horrendous things", and what would you like the moderators to do?
    - LexiMax 11mo ago
      It's so interesting that you automatically became defensive about left vs right wing bias of this site. The fact of the matter is that depending on the thread, it can swing in either direction. And that's the problem - you end up with unaccountable moderation via populism, which is the worst kind of moderation. Hacker News is not a functional social space. It can't be, by design, because it has an easily-gamed and incredibly punishing form of user moderation. The incentives for abuse are abundant, and the potential downsides are negligible because the moderators who are supposed to be a check on these abuses are demonstrably hands-off. > "Couching statements in soft language" is a significant part of keeping a polarizing discussion civil in my view, so that makes sense to me. A Modest Proposal isn't civil - it's satire. It describes in flowery language how the poor could sell their children to the rich for use as food. The dehumanization is supposed to horrify and anger you, and the satire is contained in the limitations of pretenses of civility.
      - zemo 11mo ago
        I always read it as not saying these are the limitations of civility, but that they are the purpose of civility; that civility exists specifically and exclusively as a tool to uphold existing systems of power. Anything that upholds the current power structures is definitionally civil; anything that challenges the existing structures of power is definitionally barbaric. Through that viewpoint, this very comment is polite, but not civil.

This was flagged in the last minute or two, I refreshed the page and it changed to flagged. Ridiculous.

by zemo 11mo ago

This was flagged in the last minute or two, I refreshed the page and it changed to flagged. Ridiculous.

casenmgreen 11mo ago

I am concerned flag is being abused by State run actors.

zemo 11mo ago
That seems less likely than insufferably pedantic nerds screaming “off topic!!!! off topic!!!” whenever they see anything that makes them even slightly uncomfortable.

myrmidon 11mo ago

I don't think it is ridiculous to flag topics like this. The problem is that topics like this are incredibly hard to keep civil, and the "HN factor" ("prominent" people involved chiming in) is not really there, either. It also frequently ends up in the exact same repeated arguments (at best). Personally, I'm not flagging posts like this and I'm always very happy when the tone stays civil and the discussion interesting, but I can see why people would.

deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
LexiMax 11mo ago
HN merely tries to keep up the appearance of being a place of civil debate and discussion. The bias comes out when the subject matter becomes in any way controversial. You can say some pretty horrendous things on here as long as you couch them in mealy-mouthed modest-proposal language, while there's almost no recourse for having a good faith rebuttable flagged or down-voted. In theory, the site moderators are supposed to be a check valve on this kind of abuse, but it's quite sobering to look at the age of some of the accounts who behave badly on HN and yet have somehow passed notice. I can only assume that the moderators are okay with the company they allow on the site, and I think it's worth taking a look around and asking yourself "Is this place _really_ worth contributing to?"
- zemo 11mo ago
  indeed, this is a space that "prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice"
- myrmidon 11mo ago
  > The bias comes out when the subject matter becomes in any way controversial. I do not agree on that. I think if you flip the perspective in topics like this to the other political side ("Chicago is finally doing something against illegal foreigners in the city") it would not be any less likely to get flagged. If I had to give a "best gess" for the aggregate political bias of HN, it would still be democrat/liberal/left, albeit less so than say, Reddit. > You can say some pretty horrendous things on here "Couching statements in soft language" is a significant part of keeping a polarizing discussion civil in my view, so that makes sense to me. What are those "horrendous things", and what would you like the moderators to do?
  - LexiMax 11mo ago
    It's so interesting that you automatically became defensive about left vs right wing bias of this site. The fact of the matter is that depending on the thread, it can swing in either direction. And that's the problem - you end up with unaccountable moderation via populism, which is the worst kind of moderation. Hacker News is not a functional social space. It can't be, by design, because it has an easily-gamed and incredibly punishing form of user moderation. The incentives for abuse are abundant, and the potential downsides are negligible because the moderators who are supposed to be a check on these abuses are demonstrably hands-off. > "Couching statements in soft language" is a significant part of keeping a polarizing discussion civil in my view, so that makes sense to me. A Modest Proposal isn't civil - it's satire. It describes in flowery language how the poor could sell their children to the rich for use as food. The dehumanization is supposed to horrify and anger you, and the satire is contained in the limitations of pretenses of civility.
    - zemo 11mo ago
      I always read it as not saying these are the limitations of civility, but that they are the purpose of civility; that civility exists specifically and exclusively as a tool to uphold existing systems of power. Anything that upholds the current power structures is definitionally civil; anything that challenges the existing structures of power is definitionally barbaric. Through that viewpoint, this very comment is polite, but not civil.