3 ms·

Momentary derail: > I say things [PG] dislikes... You seem to frequently and loudly say a lot of things about Google that many current and past Googlers consi

Momentary derail: > I say things [PG] dislikes... You seem to frequently and loudly say a lot of things about Google that many current and past Googlers consider to be misguided and largely incorrect. For a very long while it seemed that you were posting these statements on pretty much every Google-related article that made it to the front page. I suspect that your comments would get massively up-voted because: 1) Your writing style is strident and self-assured. Someone who writes so confidently is highly likely to be correct! 2) You're speaking poorly of an SV darling. Contrary opinions must be heard! Time and time again, your comments became the dominating thread of discussion, even if (as was very frequently the case) they had nothing to do with the issues raised in the article that they were attached to. This distressed me and others, and was made even more distressing by your tendency to speak about one of only a very few topics. The first time I saw your complaint about Google's promotion system attached to an article about the tech behind "Google's" self driving cars, I was sympathetic. The fifth time, however... I argue that if the ability for your comments to become top-placed comments has been restricted, it's not because you've said things that PG doesn't like. It's because you've seriously derailed productive, on-topic conversation in numerous threads by repeating pretty much the same largely-off-topic complaints about a former employer that you had several bad experiences with. I'm a strong proponent of free speech, but I also strongly support efforts to encourage meaningful, on-topic discussion.

michaelochurch 13y ago
You're wrong. People downvote the off-topic and obnoxious comments. I've been posting here for 3 years. Off-topic negativity (and I've made some boneheaded comments, I'll admit) gets exactly what it deserves: downvoted to shit. You make what would be a strong case if there weren't data, but I have the data from 3 years of posts (with-- again, I'll admit to this-- a wide range in terms of quality). Downvoting works and is democratic. Rankban isn't needed. Also, I've heard that I'm not the only one put on rankban for criticizing VC.
- simoncion 13y ago
  > People downvote the off-topic and obnoxious comments. The folks who run MetaFilter, Reddit, Digg, Slashdot, and any number of other large public forums would likely disagree with you. It seems that globs of angsty folks who up-vote off-topic vitriol (and down-vote things that they just don't like!) tend to occur in any open-access forum that becomes sufficiently popular. Democracy is a sub-optimal tool for promoting productive, on-topic discussion in popular public-access forums. Look at the pile of largely useless babble that is Slashdot or Youtube comments, or comments on articles attached to the Reddit frontpage for supporting evidence. Hell, even when it was small, MetaFilter understood the serious need for human moderators to help keep discussions civil and on track. > ...I've heard that I'm not the only one put on rankban for criticizing VC. I didn't and don't expect you to be swayed by my claims. You appear to be a person with very strongly held opinions. For the benefit of others, I'll summarize my previous post succinctly. For a several month period at some point in the not-too-distant past, I could guarantee three things: 1) For any randomly selected story that had something to do with Google that was still on the front page in the afternoon, a comment of yours would be one of the top four comments. 2) Your comment would have little to nothing to say about the article it was attached to (unless that article was about some management technique), and lots to say about what you felt was wrong at Google during your (allegedly) brief tenure at the company. 3) The volume of heated discussion attached to your comment would dwarf the discussion (either off-topic or on) in any other thread.

michaelochurch 13y ago

You're wrong. People downvote the off-topic and obnoxious comments. I've been posting here for 3 years. Off-topic negativity (and I've made some boneheaded comments, I'll admit) gets exactly what it deserves: downvoted to shit. You make what would be a strong case if there weren't data, but I have the data from 3 years of posts (with-- again, I'll admit to this-- a wide range in terms of quality). Downvoting works and is democratic. Rankban isn't needed. Also, I've heard that I'm not the only one put on rankban for criticizing VC.

simoncion 13y ago
> People downvote the off-topic and obnoxious comments. The folks who run MetaFilter, Reddit, Digg, Slashdot, and any number of other large public forums would likely disagree with you. It seems that globs of angsty folks who up-vote off-topic vitriol (and down-vote things that they just don't like!) tend to occur in any open-access forum that becomes sufficiently popular. Democracy is a sub-optimal tool for promoting productive, on-topic discussion in popular public-access forums. Look at the pile of largely useless babble that is Slashdot or Youtube comments, or comments on articles attached to the Reddit frontpage for supporting evidence. Hell, even when it was small, MetaFilter understood the serious need for human moderators to help keep discussions civil and on track. > ...I've heard that I'm not the only one put on rankban for criticizing VC. I didn't and don't expect you to be swayed by my claims. You appear to be a person with very strongly held opinions. For the benefit of others, I'll summarize my previous post succinctly. For a several month period at some point in the not-too-distant past, I could guarantee three things: 1) For any randomly selected story that had something to do with Google that was still on the front page in the afternoon, a comment of yours would be one of the top four comments. 2) Your comment would have little to nothing to say about the article it was attached to (unless that article was about some management technique), and lots to say about what you felt was wrong at Google during your (allegedly) brief tenure at the company. 3) The volume of heated discussion attached to your comment would dwarf the discussion (either off-topic or on) in any other thread.