3 ms·

>If no one agreed with them then theirs would be the only flag and there would be no effect. If several people agreed then there would be several flags, and tha

>If no one agreed with them then theirs would be the only flag and there would be no effect. If several people agreed then there would be several flags, and that's what appears to happen. Or a moderator. Or something else that's nixing submissions. >If you feel strongly that the data you presented is on topic then perhaps you would fare better not simply to post a bare list, but write a blog post about why short names like this are of value to startups, and how having a short domain name can radically improve your chances, and how you wrote a script to create the list, and now you're sharing it because you believe it to be of value. Actionable data isn't useful? From the comments: "Amazed how many good names are still available. Looking to do a real-estate startup? How about: crib.io (available)" "I was amazed that nag.io was still available. I snatched it!"

ColinWright 14y ago
Let me ask you this: What good is it doing you to argue with me that this submission was of value, and shouldn't've been flagged?
- mike_tan 14y ago
  I would hope -- but this isn't going to happen, by the looks of it -- that people would see the discussion and then not call out posts as being "pointless" or hype, or like Reddit, or link-bait, just because it's not to their particular liking. There shouldn't be a lexical kill switch for submissions. Or if it's moderators, they should re-think censorship as a reasonable action for posts that may not be to their taste.
  - ColinWright 14y ago
    Let me summarise what I think you're saying: * You saw value in it. * A few others clearly saw value in it. * Still others saw it as having negative value. * The ones who thought it had negative value flagged it. * They should not have done so. * Something should be done. Are you going to suggest what should be done?
    - mike_tan 14y ago
      https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5685907 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5685907
    - mike_tan 14y ago
      "14 hours ago you registered your username 7 hours ago you submitted an item that appears to have been flagged off the front page * 2 hours ago you submit an item about how unfair that is, and how everyone should have instantly realised how valuable your submission was. * Now you complain that your complaint is being flagged. * When I explain about how things work, you just continually come back and say that it shouldn't be like that. Well, that's how it might appear. Welcome to HN." >Well, that's how it might appear. Welcome to HN. This is a dead submission. Censored.
      - ColinWright 14y ago
        It's not dead, because I can still see it, and I haven't got "ShowDead" turned on. It's not censored, it's just been flagged. You don't seem to understand the culture here, and you seem unwilling to try to learn. Meta-discussions are almost invariably flagged, because all too often other forums drown in a self-inflicted morass of navel-gazing. Are you really surprised that people are flagging your complaint about how not everyone realized the value of your second ever submission? And now I see you've made another complaint. I've tried to help you see how things work here, but you haven't yet even got enough karma to see the "flag" link, you appear not to have read the guidelines, and all you seem to be doing is complaining that people are behaving in ways you don't understand. If you insist on putting your own uninformed interpretations on things and not listening to explanations from people who have been here five years, I don't know how to help you.
- mike_tan 14y ago
  "Let me summarise what I think you're saying: * You saw value in it. * A few others clearly saw value in it. * Still others saw it as having negative value. * The ones who thought it had negative value flagged it. * They should not have done so. * Something should be done. Are you going to suggest what should be done?" This submission got the same treatment. It would seem, even trying to talk about change can't be done. A fair vote taken down.
  - ColinWright 14y ago
    Meta-discussions are almost always flagged and downvoted very quickly. If you'd been around for longer and paid attention then you'd know that. In particular, meta-discussion without specific, definite suggestions as to how to improve things get given very short shrift. And look, here is an item with 7 points and 22 (and now more) comments. Again, points/comments is very small, so it will disappear quickly. And again, this discussion has very little actual value. let me try to summarise how it might appear: * 14 hours ago you registered your username * 7 hours ago you submitted an item that appears to have been flagged off the front page * 2 hours ago you submit an item about how unfair that is, and how everyone should have instantly realised how valuable your submission was. * Now you complain that your complaint is being flagged. * When I explain about how things work, you just continually come back and say that it shouldn't be like that. Well, that's how it might appear. Welcome to HN. Added in edit ... In this comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5685591 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5685591 you said: ... it seems to only take one person to vehemently object. No, it takes several people responding to what they see as a valid objection. One objection on its own, vehement or otherwise, doesn't have any real effect. It only matters if, on balance, people agree and take the trouble to flag it.

ColinWright 14y ago

Let me ask you this: What good is it doing you to argue with me that this submission was of value, and shouldn't've been flagged?

mike_tan 14y ago
I would hope -- but this isn't going to happen, by the looks of it -- that people would see the discussion and then not call out posts as being "pointless" or hype, or like Reddit, or link-bait, just because it's not to their particular liking. There shouldn't be a lexical kill switch for submissions. Or if it's moderators, they should re-think censorship as a reasonable action for posts that may not be to their taste.
- ColinWright 14y ago
  Let me summarise what I think you're saying: * You saw value in it. * A few others clearly saw value in it. * Still others saw it as having negative value. * The ones who thought it had negative value flagged it. * They should not have done so. * Something should be done. Are you going to suggest what should be done?
  - mike_tan 14y ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5685907 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5685907
  - mike_tan 14y ago
    "14 hours ago you registered your username 7 hours ago you submitted an item that appears to have been flagged off the front page * 2 hours ago you submit an item about how unfair that is, and how everyone should have instantly realised how valuable your submission was. * Now you complain that your complaint is being flagged. * When I explain about how things work, you just continually come back and say that it shouldn't be like that. Well, that's how it might appear. Welcome to HN." >Well, that's how it might appear. Welcome to HN. This is a dead submission. Censored.
    - ColinWright 14y ago
      It's not dead, because I can still see it, and I haven't got "ShowDead" turned on. It's not censored, it's just been flagged. You don't seem to understand the culture here, and you seem unwilling to try to learn. Meta-discussions are almost invariably flagged, because all too often other forums drown in a self-inflicted morass of navel-gazing. Are you really surprised that people are flagging your complaint about how not everyone realized the value of your second ever submission? And now I see you've made another complaint. I've tried to help you see how things work here, but you haven't yet even got enough karma to see the "flag" link, you appear not to have read the guidelines, and all you seem to be doing is complaining that people are behaving in ways you don't understand. If you insist on putting your own uninformed interpretations on things and not listening to explanations from people who have been here five years, I don't know how to help you.
mike_tan 14y ago
"Let me summarise what I think you're saying: * You saw value in it. * A few others clearly saw value in it. * Still others saw it as having negative value. * The ones who thought it had negative value flagged it. * They should not have done so. * Something should be done. Are you going to suggest what should be done?" This submission got the same treatment. It would seem, even trying to talk about change can't be done. A fair vote taken down.
- ColinWright 14y ago
  Meta-discussions are almost always flagged and downvoted very quickly. If you'd been around for longer and paid attention then you'd know that. In particular, meta-discussion without specific, definite suggestions as to how to improve things get given very short shrift. And look, here is an item with 7 points and 22 (and now more) comments. Again, points/comments is very small, so it will disappear quickly. And again, this discussion has very little actual value. let me try to summarise how it might appear: * 14 hours ago you registered your username * 7 hours ago you submitted an item that appears to have been flagged off the front page * 2 hours ago you submit an item about how unfair that is, and how everyone should have instantly realised how valuable your submission was. * Now you complain that your complaint is being flagged. * When I explain about how things work, you just continually come back and say that it shouldn't be like that. Well, that's how it might appear. Welcome to HN. Added in edit ... In this comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5685591 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5685591 you said: ... it seems to only take one person to vehemently object. No, it takes several people responding to what they see as a valid objection. One objection on its own, vehement or otherwise, doesn't have any real effect. It only matters if, on balance, people agree and take the trouble to flag it.