5 ms·

Well...... for some reason I'm yet to even begin to understand (I have mailed the site, got no reply at all, but even so I assume its something my end, but it d

by alan_cx 14y ago

Well...... for some reason I'm yet to even begin to understand (I have mailed the site, got no reply at all, but even so I assume its something my end, but it doesn't happen on any other site, weird...), HN takes about 30 secs to load any page, and I don't get the CSS either, but I still use the site regularly as I value the content. Make of that what you will.

Cherian 14y ago
Author here. I am not sure I really understand the question. Can you explain a bit more?
- alan_cx 14y ago
  No question. Just showing that in this case speed isnt putting me off using the site.
bad_user 14y ago
30s to load any page? Really? Just gathered some stats from my browser by loading the link we are on: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4973322 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4973322 11 requests 20.91KB transferred 921ms (onload: 949ms, DOMContentLoaded: 927ms This had caching turned on, while with caching turned off: 11 requests 38.49KB transferred 1.29s (onload: 1.30s, DOMContentLoaded: 1.12s) Note that I'm on a broadband connection, but on the other hand I'm connecting from Romania, so about 100-300ms of latency come from my non-US location if the website doesn't use some kind of CDN.
- alan_cx 14y ago
  Quite. As I say, it must be something my end, specific to me. Other wise loads of people would be complaining.
badgar 14y ago
You've been slowbanned. A moderator didn't like something you said and wants you to leave HN, but didn't feel that hellbanning you was appropriate. Instead, they want you to get frustrated with the slowness and give up.
- jh3 14y ago
  I can't tell if this is sarcasm. Is slowbanning a thing?
  - neumann_alfred 14y ago
    It is, so is hellbanning (which means your posts don't show up to anyone but you). If you suspect having been slowbanned, just log out; if the site suddenly loads super fast consistently, and slow when you log in, you know it's that. It's petty, and rather random, which is why there is zero process I guess (no "you have been banned because you broke rule X" etc., and zero moderator accountability). When I don't get a reply to posts of mine for a while, I usually to log out and look at my posts to make sure it's not yet another hellban. If you get hellbanned, just make a new account, but make sure you deleted all ycombinator cookies before you do. Be sure to get a laugh out of it, too, or the terrorists won.
    - RyanZAG 14y ago
      That's pretty pathetic if true. If you're going to ban someone, just man up and ban them. Passive-aggressive methods like that feel like they're straight out of a playground. Although I guess some of silicon valley acts like a playground, so that makes sense.
      - bad_user 14y ago
        The point of hell-banning would be to make the user leave the community without him noticing that he was banned, because if he does notice, all he has to do would be to create a new account. This works by not showing his comments to others, which in return means that the user will not get any conversations going or any upvotes and pretty soon he'll start thinking that the others are ignoring him completely, which is in general a good incentive for someone to leave a community. The problem with hell-banning is that for users that post a lot of comments, they'll soon realize that they are hell-banned and trolls (in particular) can only be stopped if they are genuinely ignored. For this reason, if you want to stop trolls, slow-banning could be a good alternative by making usage of the site unpleasant. This way they can still interact with others, but it will be painful for them to do so. I agree that these methods are passive-aggressive and shouldn't be used on non-trolls, even if such people do not comply with the community's guidelines. The problem with this site is that user accounts do not have emails attached ... as a much more effective method for making most users behave according to guidelines would be to send them a warning.

by alan_cx 14y ago

Cherian 14y ago

Author here. I am not sure I really understand the question. Can you explain a bit more?

alan_cx 14y ago
No question. Just showing that in this case speed isnt putting me off using the site.

bad_user 14y ago

30s to load any page? Really? Just gathered some stats from my browser by loading the link we are on: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4973322 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4973322 11 requests 20.91KB transferred 921ms (onload: 949ms, DOMContentLoaded: 927ms This had caching turned on, while with caching turned off: 11 requests 38.49KB transferred 1.29s (onload: 1.30s, DOMContentLoaded: 1.12s) Note that I'm on a broadband connection, but on the other hand I'm connecting from Romania, so about 100-300ms of latency come from my non-US location if the website doesn't use some kind of CDN.

alan_cx 14y ago
Quite. As I say, it must be something my end, specific to me. Other wise loads of people would be complaining.

badgar 14y ago

You've been slowbanned. A moderator didn't like something you said and wants you to leave HN, but didn't feel that hellbanning you was appropriate. Instead, they want you to get frustrated with the slowness and give up.

jh3 14y ago
I can't tell if this is sarcasm. Is slowbanning a thing?
- neumann_alfred 14y ago
  It is, so is hellbanning (which means your posts don't show up to anyone but you). If you suspect having been slowbanned, just log out; if the site suddenly loads super fast consistently, and slow when you log in, you know it's that. It's petty, and rather random, which is why there is zero process I guess (no "you have been banned because you broke rule X" etc., and zero moderator accountability). When I don't get a reply to posts of mine for a while, I usually to log out and look at my posts to make sure it's not yet another hellban. If you get hellbanned, just make a new account, but make sure you deleted all ycombinator cookies before you do. Be sure to get a laugh out of it, too, or the terrorists won.
  - RyanZAG 14y ago
    That's pretty pathetic if true. If you're going to ban someone, just man up and ban them. Passive-aggressive methods like that feel like they're straight out of a playground. Although I guess some of silicon valley acts like a playground, so that makes sense.
    - bad_user 14y ago
      The point of hell-banning would be to make the user leave the community without him noticing that he was banned, because if he does notice, all he has to do would be to create a new account. This works by not showing his comments to others, which in return means that the user will not get any conversations going or any upvotes and pretty soon he'll start thinking that the others are ignoring him completely, which is in general a good incentive for someone to leave a community. The problem with hell-banning is that for users that post a lot of comments, they'll soon realize that they are hell-banned and trolls (in particular) can only be stopped if they are genuinely ignored. For this reason, if you want to stop trolls, slow-banning could be a good alternative by making usage of the site unpleasant. This way they can still interact with others, but it will be painful for them to do so. I agree that these methods are passive-aggressive and shouldn't be used on non-trolls, even if such people do not comply with the community's guidelines. The problem with this site is that user accounts do not have emails attached ... as a much more effective method for making most users behave according to guidelines would be to send them a warning.