4 ms·

These political discussions on HN are awkward, and I wish they'd stop. It's not because political discussions aren't important, they are, but because I don't t

These political discussions on HN are awkward, and I wish they'd stop. It's not because political discussions aren't important, they are, but because I don't think this is a useful place to have them. Counterarguments are self-censored, because any moderates calmly pointing out hyperboles tend to be downvoted by the more passionate participants in the discussion. With the moderates bowing out, online voting systems quickly gel into two extremes, maybe a far right and a far left. That's not sustainable though, one side quickly gets bigger and wins. The losing side now is best off self-censoring, because why get downvoted when you can just comment on other topics? You eventually get a political monoculture representing one extreme, with no voices of opposition or moderation.* No moderation system has yet promoted any useful political dialogue, because you can't convince the 5% of people who are most emotional to rate argument quality independently of personal beliefs. That's why, in general, I'm opposed to the political pulpit of HN, even for positions I agree with. It's a bad medium for good discussions on issues of significant controversy. * (What's admittedly tricky is sometimes a political monoculture is the correct result. If someone made arguments on behalf of the KKK, we don't need a full and fair debate providing a false equivalence between both sides. One side is just wrong. The problem is, with politics, everyone thinks they're arguing against someone else who is just wrong, just like the KKK. There's no objective way to determine whether or not both sides of a discussion hold merit worthy of a full debate, or whether we should just downvote one side out of the discussion before it leaves the gate.)

sage_joch 13y ago
Snowden unveiled a horrifying truth about our government: widespread surveillance has been combined with a class of officials who do not face consequences for breaking the law. I don't think it's hyperbolic to say that the Constitution is facing an existential threat. Normally I would be sympathetic to the view that politics should stay off HN. But this feels different. I would hope that people wouldn't self-censor their counter-arguments, however. The possibility that things aren't quite as bad as I suspect helps me sleep at night. And the truth is, there is reason for hope.
- tptacek 13y ago
  Here, the predictable impassioned defense of hyperbole.
- dylangs1030 13y ago
  The Constitution is not under any kind of "existential" threat. You should be more worried about citizens not knowing their own Constitution than you should be worried about the government breaking it. Literally any valid view of American history would immediately demonstrate that we are moving forward in terms of overall liberty, not backward. With the possible exception of disenfranchised minority groups and lower classes, there has been increasing political transparency and quality of life in every respect, and the former are only still mistreated because of the power vacuum in their communities. The only reason why this is so outrageous is because people have short memories - I doubt many people are as shocked at this who lived through the Nixon Watergate scandal. That kind of corruption wouldn't so easily take place today.
madaxe 13y ago
I think political discourse is important, and smart folks should engage in it. HN I'd actually say has better discourse than just about anywhere else online, as hackers, more often than not, are open to revising their opinions and ideas based on objective fact. After all, you wouldn't get terribly far coding were you to doggedly retain irrational beliefs about the subject matter you're engaging in. As to downvoting - not so much, I don't think. HN's moderation system is pretty effective in ensuring that poor voters and contributors don't get to continue doing so. The SNR here is still much better than, say, reddit. Finally, the argument of "we shouldn't talk about this, because it's polarising" is a dangerous one, as ultimately it serves only to stifle discourse.
- jacquesm 13y ago
  From what I gather the main reason for keeping religion and politics off HN is to prevent people from losing respect for each other due to opposing views on either of these subjects. I'm not sure if that's a net benefit or a net negative (it looks to be a benefit), one would hope adults can at least agree to disagree.
  - madaxe 13y ago
    I respect people with well formed and rationally expounded opinions more, whether or not they align with mine. I do not respect people with opinions held out of dogma, with an unwillingness to explore other viewpoints. Then again, my personal proclivities cannot possibly be taken as representative of the entirety of HN, so I take your point.
    - tptacek 13y ago
      No you don't. You participate almost exclusively in political discussions on HN, and when you do, you routinely attack the people you're talking to, for instance when you told this commenter to "use their brain instead of their TV for once": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6062466 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6062466 ... or you deliberately reduce arguments to inflammatory absurdities to try to win them: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6064531 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6064531 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6006933 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6006933 ... or you just get mad and yell: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6062497 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6062497 In ~75 days of comments I didn't see you once acknowledge a point anyone else here made, even one that agreed with you. It appears that in the past ~quarter or so, you haven't observed a single argument that you managed to simultaneously disagree with and "respect". We should be able to presume that you know your own comments better than I could know them in 5 minutes of skimming, so I invite you to prove me wrong and show me the place in the last 2 months where you demonstrated this appreciation of well-formed comments you disagree with.
pessimizer 13y ago
Politics isn't a linear continuum from right to left, and the position between two extremes isn't necessarily more rational, even if the positions at the two extremes that you have chosen to represent right and left are both wrong.
loso 13y ago
This is the most sensible post in this thread. A good example is the user rayiner being down voted for an opposing opinion down further in the thread. He has not trolled, he has just made an argument that people disagreed with and he is being down voted. The political discussions on HN have become a pretty one sided affair (even though it is a side I for the most part agree with) and a net negative as a whole.
- res0nat0r 13y ago
  Ironically enough your post is being downvoted. You are not allowed to disagree with the hive mind on this topic or you risk being ensnared in it's wrath.
dlitz 13y ago
> These political discussions on HN are awkward, and I wish they'd stop. I think "Worse is Better" applies here. Political discussions in online forums (or anywhere) aren't ideal, but I still think it's better to have them than not to.

sage_joch 13y ago

Snowden unveiled a horrifying truth about our government: widespread surveillance has been combined with a class of officials who do not face consequences for breaking the law. I don't think it's hyperbolic to say that the Constitution is facing an existential threat. Normally I would be sympathetic to the view that politics should stay off HN. But this feels different. I would hope that people wouldn't self-censor their counter-arguments, however. The possibility that things aren't quite as bad as I suspect helps me sleep at night. And the truth is, there is reason for hope.

tptacek 13y ago
Here, the predictable impassioned defense of hyperbole.
dylangs1030 13y ago
The Constitution is not under any kind of "existential" threat. You should be more worried about citizens not knowing their own Constitution than you should be worried about the government breaking it. Literally any valid view of American history would immediately demonstrate that we are moving forward in terms of overall liberty, not backward. With the possible exception of disenfranchised minority groups and lower classes, there has been increasing political transparency and quality of life in every respect, and the former are only still mistreated because of the power vacuum in their communities. The only reason why this is so outrageous is because people have short memories - I doubt many people are as shocked at this who lived through the Nixon Watergate scandal. That kind of corruption wouldn't so easily take place today.

madaxe 13y ago

I think political discourse is important, and smart folks should engage in it. HN I'd actually say has better discourse than just about anywhere else online, as hackers, more often than not, are open to revising their opinions and ideas based on objective fact. After all, you wouldn't get terribly far coding were you to doggedly retain irrational beliefs about the subject matter you're engaging in. As to downvoting - not so much, I don't think. HN's moderation system is pretty effective in ensuring that poor voters and contributors don't get to continue doing so. The SNR here is still much better than, say, reddit. Finally, the argument of "we shouldn't talk about this, because it's polarising" is a dangerous one, as ultimately it serves only to stifle discourse.

jacquesm 13y ago
From what I gather the main reason for keeping religion and politics off HN is to prevent people from losing respect for each other due to opposing views on either of these subjects. I'm not sure if that's a net benefit or a net negative (it looks to be a benefit), one would hope adults can at least agree to disagree.
- madaxe 13y ago
  I respect people with well formed and rationally expounded opinions more, whether or not they align with mine. I do not respect people with opinions held out of dogma, with an unwillingness to explore other viewpoints. Then again, my personal proclivities cannot possibly be taken as representative of the entirety of HN, so I take your point.
  - tptacek 13y ago
    No you don't. You participate almost exclusively in political discussions on HN, and when you do, you routinely attack the people you're talking to, for instance when you told this commenter to "use their brain instead of their TV for once": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6062466 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6062466 ... or you deliberately reduce arguments to inflammatory absurdities to try to win them: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6064531 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6064531 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6006933 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6006933 ... or you just get mad and yell: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6062497 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6062497 In ~75 days of comments I didn't see you once acknowledge a point anyone else here made, even one that agreed with you. It appears that in the past ~quarter or so, you haven't observed a single argument that you managed to simultaneously disagree with and "respect". We should be able to presume that you know your own comments better than I could know them in 5 minutes of skimming, so I invite you to prove me wrong and show me the place in the last 2 months where you demonstrated this appreciation of well-formed comments you disagree with.

pessimizer 13y ago

Politics isn't a linear continuum from right to left, and the position between two extremes isn't necessarily more rational, even if the positions at the two extremes that you have chosen to represent right and left are both wrong.

loso 13y ago

This is the most sensible post in this thread. A good example is the user rayiner being down voted for an opposing opinion down further in the thread. He has not trolled, he has just made an argument that people disagreed with and he is being down voted. The political discussions on HN have become a pretty one sided affair (even though it is a side I for the most part agree with) and a net negative as a whole.

res0nat0r 13y ago
Ironically enough your post is being downvoted. You are not allowed to disagree with the hive mind on this topic or you risk being ensnared in it's wrath.

dlitz 13y ago

> These political discussions on HN are awkward, and I wish they'd stop. I think "Worse is Better" applies here. Political discussions in online forums (or anywhere) aren't ideal, but I still think it's better to have them than not to.