4 ms·

Decades ago (1995), when I was barely a decade old, I created a maintainence/repair website for a Motorola product (pre-iFixit). A fellow geek created his own s

Decades ago (1995), when I was barely a decade old, I created a maintainence/repair website for a Motorola product (pre-iFixit). A fellow geek created his own similar website, focusing more on general product usage. Neither of us webmasters took constructive feedback well, often lashing out at fellow usenet geeks who were just trying to be helpful. Tantrums, from us both. Twenty years later we randomly met in-person @DEF-CON (recognized his unique name) — he ended up being a year younger than me! We exchanged chuckles about what big personalities us two little kids had been, blasting angst into the aether. Motorola had linked to both our websites in their official documentation, despite our pottymouths =P ---- When I witness road rage (myself, included), I pretend the aggressor is a toddler. This makes it easier (and more effective!) to handle the rage that often passes through miscommunication(s). ---- I've been a forumjunkie since 1994, and HN is the only online forum I still participate within — mostly because of the techgenre, but also because the rules here prevent all sorts of perpetualSeptembers from scattering themselves among otherwise-constructive threads. DanG&co: thanks for cultivating an exceptional online community OP: Thanks for trying; I haven't used your product, but the premise seems noble... my main question to ya'll is: how do you prevent overbearing censorship (e.g. does karma influence how "tough" your product is on particular users, or are we all equally correctable)?

vintagedave 8mo ago
I empathise. We definitely mature over time :) And we all have bad days. If we can bring the HN kind of interaction approach to more sites, we'll call ourselves successful. Dan and co provide an inspiration through this site. Someone commented below something about automating dan, and... dan, if you read this, I laughed, but kinda ;) At least, bringing a chance for or what we can of the general HN approach to other spaces. Re specific users or karma, everyone is equal. Comments are judged on their own merits, within the context of the topic they are about (the API allows adding more context, such as other comments in the thread, which isn't shown in the demo.) We've played around with the idea of building a kind of reputation over time, ie allowing people to build a score. If so, it's important to note that's not based on the content of what was written (eg specific political views) but based on how well, how healthily, someone expresses it. That line does blur because some opinions are inherently unhealthy, and cannot be expressed in a way that respects others, demonstrates decency / humanity, etc, but within the spectrum of 'being a decent person and just trying to interact well including while disagreeing' we specifically do not want to police topics. We want instead to encourage, and in future maybe try to build a rep, for how well someone engages with others. And returning to your question, if we did that, every comment would still be assessed standalone. We want people to grow, kinda like you were talking about. If someone expressed themselves poorly a year ago and behaves more healthily now, now is what should be reflected.
- ProllyInfamous 8mo ago
  >allowing people to build a score I think of this as "letting their voice speak" — but yes, a "score"/tolerance of sorts. >now is what should be reflected. growth. context. rebirth. forgiveness. It's always so shocking when decades-old writings discredit modern thinkers.

vintagedave 8mo ago

I empathise. We definitely mature over time :) And we all have bad days. If we can bring the HN kind of interaction approach to more sites, we'll call ourselves successful. Dan and co provide an inspiration through this site. Someone commented below something about automating dan, and... dan, if you read this, I laughed, but kinda ;) At least, bringing a chance for or what we can of the general HN approach to other spaces. Re specific users or karma, everyone is equal. Comments are judged on their own merits, within the context of the topic they are about (the API allows adding more context, such as other comments in the thread, which isn't shown in the demo.) We've played around with the idea of building a kind of reputation over time, ie allowing people to build a score. If so, it's important to note that's not based on the content of what was written (eg specific political views) but based on how well, how healthily, someone expresses it. That line does blur because some opinions are inherently unhealthy, and cannot be expressed in a way that respects others, demonstrates decency / humanity, etc, but within the spectrum of 'being a decent person and just trying to interact well including while disagreeing' we specifically do not want to police topics. We want instead to encourage, and in future maybe try to build a rep, for how well someone engages with others. And returning to your question, if we did that, every comment would still be assessed standalone. We want people to grow, kinda like you were talking about. If someone expressed themselves poorly a year ago and behaves more healthily now, now is what should be reflected.

ProllyInfamous 8mo ago
>allowing people to build a score I think of this as "letting their voice speak" — but yes, a "score"/tolerance of sorts. >now is what should be reflected. growth. context. rebirth. forgiveness. It's always so shocking when decades-old writings discredit modern thinkers.