4 ms·
I think we need to err on the side of caution here. In particular, we need to carefully distinguish between (1) those users who post maliciously/troll, and (2)
by ekpyrotic 14y ago
I think we need to err on the side of caution here.
In particular, we need to carefully distinguish between (1) those users who post maliciously/troll, and (2) those users who suffer from mental illnesses.
I don't know which user(s) you have in mind, but there's a well-known, regular HN poster who posts on a 'dead' account---or accounts---and suffers from severe schizophrenia.
When I see his posts, I---as a member of the community---feel quite guilty. He has been ostrasized through no obvious fault of his own. In fact, I use 'show dead' in order to assuage that guilt. Although his posts don't add to the discussion, they are, at the very most, an inconvenience.
I worry about the psychological toll that permanent bans could have on such people. With the recent suicides of both Jacintha Saldanha and Aaron Swartz, I think caution is advisable.
We often underestimate the effects of our actions.
- kunai 14y agoLosethos, I believe. His accomplishments are greatly regarded in the community. His comments, not so much. It makes me sad when people with such talent are hindered through an illness they didn't deserve to get. He has an extremely bad reputation in the community from people too immature to understand schizophrenia or mental illness. That said, the "show-dead" option is there for a reason. Posts that do not add to the discussion will get downvoted whether the commenter is schizophrenic or not. I do think that sometimes HN goes a bit over the top in some aspects of authoritarianism, but for the most part, HN is pretty fair and square.