2 ms·

If I were you I would be more concerned with the fact that you have allowed what was once a well-respected forum to become little more than a spam platform for

If I were you I would be more concerned with the fact that you have allowed what was once a well-respected forum to become little more than a spam platform for AI shills. You can silence me, but I am not wrong and I’m not the only one who has noticed this. It’s very obvious. You should understand that one way people improve the standards of a commons is by imposing social controls on those who violate norms which create a healthy society, such as by shilling. That is normal behavior on every forum I’ve ever seen. When you allow there to be 100x more of this mindless slop than of anything else, the most any individual can do to resist the tide is to contribute to the voices trying to make antisocial behavior come with a cost. It works, and because it works, people will continue to do it until you figure out how to keep a clean commons. PS. I suppose you would probably say the same thing to Rob Pike (if he were a user of your site which he doubtless is not). https://skyview.social/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbsky.app%2Fprofile%2Frobpike.io%2Fpost%2F3matwg6w3ic2s&viewtype=tree https://skyview.social/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbsky.app%2Fprofile...

tomhow 9mo ago
Please don't sermonize to distract from your own record of disrespect towards HN and its guidelines. The people you claim have “allowed” this have maintained HN for many years – 13 in dang's case, the majority of its history. The primary reason this is a place where people want to participate is because of the guidelines that have been developed and refined since HN's inception, and that we spend hours each day upholding. People have been heralding the decline of HN since it was barely more than a few months old [1], yet it continues to grow as a place where people want to showcase interesting work, which is what we most care about. Generated comments and posts are banned, and we state this frequently. I spend time each day evaluating submissions and Show HNs to determine whether they're human-authored or AI-generated. We welcome people to flag generated content and email us so we can ban accounts with a pattern of posting it. Yes, it takes time for these mechanisms to kick in. HN is a public, anonymous site. Anyone can post anything, and the immune system takes time to do its work. That's always been the case. There is a cohort of community members who have demonstrated a commitment to making HN better over several years through: (a) submitting good articles, (b) posting thoughtful comments, (c) observing the guidelines, (d) flagging bad submissions and comments, and (e) emailing us to point out guidelines breaches and to discuss the healthy functioning of the site. These are the people we listen to when they express concerns about HN's health, because they've established a track record of genuine contribution and care over several years. From you, we see two comments prior to 2023, and little or none of the above kinds of actions. Instead: ragey fulmination, hyperbole, and ascribing views to us without basis. And now you hold yourself up as HN's heroic defender, having never undertaken the earnest, unglamorous, unseen work that other community members do to make this the place you claim needs you to defend. Please, if you really want HN to be better, you are most welcome to start doing the things that other community members quietly do every day to help make it better. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=373801 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=373801

tomhow 9mo ago

Please don't sermonize to distract from your own record of disrespect towards HN and its guidelines. The people you claim have “allowed” this have maintained HN for many years – 13 in dang's case, the majority of its history. The primary reason this is a place where people want to participate is because of the guidelines that have been developed and refined since HN's inception, and that we spend hours each day upholding. People have been heralding the decline of HN since it was barely more than a few months old [1], yet it continues to grow as a place where people want to showcase interesting work, which is what we most care about. Generated comments and posts are banned, and we state this frequently. I spend time each day evaluating submissions and Show HNs to determine whether they're human-authored or AI-generated. We welcome people to flag generated content and email us so we can ban accounts with a pattern of posting it. Yes, it takes time for these mechanisms to kick in. HN is a public, anonymous site. Anyone can post anything, and the immune system takes time to do its work. That's always been the case. There is a cohort of community members who have demonstrated a commitment to making HN better over several years through: (a) submitting good articles, (b) posting thoughtful comments, (c) observing the guidelines, (d) flagging bad submissions and comments, and (e) emailing us to point out guidelines breaches and to discuss the healthy functioning of the site. These are the people we listen to when they express concerns about HN's health, because they've established a track record of genuine contribution and care over several years. From you, we see two comments prior to 2023, and little or none of the above kinds of actions. Instead: ragey fulmination, hyperbole, and ascribing views to us without basis. And now you hold yourself up as HN's heroic defender, having never undertaken the earnest, unglamorous, unseen work that other community members do to make this the place you claim needs you to defend. Please, if you really want HN to be better, you are most welcome to start doing the things that other community members quietly do every day to help make it better. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=373801 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=373801