4 ms·

Why are all the comments mentioning picking the back of the lock now [dead]?

by shrughes 17y ago

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
krog 17y ago
Similar things happened with a 37signals story a couple weeks back.
stanley_choad 17y ago
A very good question. The same thing happened a little over a week ago, when a moderator deep-sixed all submissions of a particular thirtyseven signals post (sorry, I am avoiding regex bait now). In fact, it appears that my account which attempted to post the aforementioned story is crippled, which is to say that all comments posted thereafter are auto-killed, yet do not appear so when I am logged in. Another good question: does it bother anyone else that superuser-level moderation occurs in secret without any public recourse or justification?
- rick2047 17y ago
  Yes it bothers me very much, if they wanna cripple someone's account why not just admit it?They are the superuser moderators, who's gonna go against them?
- tokenadult 17y ago
  does it bother anyone else that superuser-level moderation occurs in secret without any public recourse or justification? It is a good question. It doesn't bother me. Maybe that's because I've been in the role of an ordinary user on plenty of sites with little or no moderation, and I have also been in the role of a moderator (with varying degrees of moderation power and authority in the chain of command) on various sites. Most discussion sites need moderation. Most moderation actions don't need metadiscussion.
  - notrick2047 17y ago
    Talking about moderation, I posted some things from an account which the people of HN didnt like and without any reason I have been crippled, the same thing is happening to me. All the comments that I post appear when I am logged In but they are actually not there. This is preposterous. HN has steeped so low that they cannot even take views other than there own?Ridiculous.
  - stanley_choad 17y ago
    I agree that comment sites require moderation, but HN makes every appearance of being community-moderated. The voting system is supposed to take care of the signal-to-noise ratio, and I think it does a pretty good job. The moderation actions I am talking about, however, are unilateral (you can't even ask why), magical (you don't know it is happening), persistent (the account posts dead comments for a period of time, perhaps infinite), and arbitrary (the comments are not necessarily undesirable or contrary to the HN culture). These traits are bothersome to me, and to at least a few others. I think it warrants a discussion.
    - allenbrunson 17y ago
      actually, news.yc is not "community-moderated." users have some input, but it is vastly subordinate to the power of the editors. it is them that sets the overall tone of the site. if it wasn't this way, we would have been overrun by trolls long ago. if your account gets killed, you email pg to find out why. he will almost certainly reinstate you, if you agree to stop doing whatever it was that got your account [dead]ed in the first place.
- ryanwaggoner 17y ago
  At the very least, comments and stories that are killed should show the username of the user responsible. Is there any real justification for keeping it secret?
  - pg 17y ago
    Nearly everything that's killed is killed by software, not manually. But if you want you can consider me responsible.
    - notnotrick2047 17y ago
      Now this is ridiculous I have changed two accounts in two days, just because for some reason I have pissed of software. It doesnt give any reason, it just cripples my accounts and kills my posts. This is preposterous. At least a reason should be given for such, an I am rather surprised to say, rude and uncivilized behavior. All the posts that got my accounts killed had one thing in common, I posted something against HN. Cant it even take criticism anymore?
      - nitrogen 17y ago
        Just out of curiosity I looked at some of your older posts on your other accounts (turning on showdead). Being relatively new here myself (about 7 months) I can't speak for the staff or the downvoters, but if you were to look at your posting history over the past 21 days you might be able to infer the behaviors that get them upset. You might even try a statistical analysis of your killed posts if you really want to understand what is triggering the automatic kill switch. The point I want to make is that when participating in a community, there is usually a natural feedback process that allows one to discover the rules and values of that community. If one does something out of line, the community will swiftly react. Multiple negative reactions are a sign that one's behavior isn't in line with the community's standards, and should be used as an input to the decision-making loop that says, "Wait, maybe they don't like it when I do X all the time." Then, you either decide to adapt to the community, or you leave. Also, most communities will only accept a limited amount of correction from any given source, which varies by source and by community. One of the behaviors that's likely to earn repeated negative feedback is trying to change the community more than allowed by one's standing within the community.

Why are all the comments mentioning picking the back of the lock now [dead]?

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

krog 17y ago

Similar things happened with a 37signals story a couple weeks back.

stanley_choad 17y ago

A very good question. The same thing happened a little over a week ago, when a moderator deep-sixed all submissions of a particular thirtyseven signals post (sorry, I am avoiding regex bait now). In fact, it appears that my account which attempted to post the aforementioned story is crippled, which is to say that all comments posted thereafter are auto-killed, yet do not appear so when I am logged in. Another good question: does it bother anyone else that superuser-level moderation occurs in secret without any public recourse or justification?

rick2047 17y ago
Yes it bothers me very much, if they wanna cripple someone's account why not just admit it?They are the superuser moderators, who's gonna go against them?
tokenadult 17y ago
does it bother anyone else that superuser-level moderation occurs in secret without any public recourse or justification? It is a good question. It doesn't bother me. Maybe that's because I've been in the role of an ordinary user on plenty of sites with little or no moderation, and I have also been in the role of a moderator (with varying degrees of moderation power and authority in the chain of command) on various sites. Most discussion sites need moderation. Most moderation actions don't need metadiscussion.
- notrick2047 17y ago
  Talking about moderation, I posted some things from an account which the people of HN didnt like and without any reason I have been crippled, the same thing is happening to me. All the comments that I post appear when I am logged In but they are actually not there. This is preposterous. HN has steeped so low that they cannot even take views other than there own?Ridiculous.
- stanley_choad 17y ago
  I agree that comment sites require moderation, but HN makes every appearance of being community-moderated. The voting system is supposed to take care of the signal-to-noise ratio, and I think it does a pretty good job. The moderation actions I am talking about, however, are unilateral (you can't even ask why), magical (you don't know it is happening), persistent (the account posts dead comments for a period of time, perhaps infinite), and arbitrary (the comments are not necessarily undesirable or contrary to the HN culture). These traits are bothersome to me, and to at least a few others. I think it warrants a discussion.
  - allenbrunson 17y ago
    actually, news.yc is not "community-moderated." users have some input, but it is vastly subordinate to the power of the editors. it is them that sets the overall tone of the site. if it wasn't this way, we would have been overrun by trolls long ago. if your account gets killed, you email pg to find out why. he will almost certainly reinstate you, if you agree to stop doing whatever it was that got your account [dead]ed in the first place.
ryanwaggoner 17y ago
At the very least, comments and stories that are killed should show the username of the user responsible. Is there any real justification for keeping it secret?
- pg 17y ago
  Nearly everything that's killed is killed by software, not manually. But if you want you can consider me responsible.
  - notnotrick2047 17y ago
    Now this is ridiculous I have changed two accounts in two days, just because for some reason I have pissed of software. It doesnt give any reason, it just cripples my accounts and kills my posts. This is preposterous. At least a reason should be given for such, an I am rather surprised to say, rude and uncivilized behavior. All the posts that got my accounts killed had one thing in common, I posted something against HN. Cant it even take criticism anymore?
    - nitrogen 17y ago
      Just out of curiosity I looked at some of your older posts on your other accounts (turning on showdead). Being relatively new here myself (about 7 months) I can't speak for the staff or the downvoters, but if you were to look at your posting history over the past 21 days you might be able to infer the behaviors that get them upset. You might even try a statistical analysis of your killed posts if you really want to understand what is triggering the automatic kill switch. The point I want to make is that when participating in a community, there is usually a natural feedback process that allows one to discover the rules and values of that community. If one does something out of line, the community will swiftly react. Multiple negative reactions are a sign that one's behavior isn't in line with the community's standards, and should be used as an input to the decision-making loop that says, "Wait, maybe they don't like it when I do X all the time." Then, you either decide to adapt to the community, or you leave. Also, most communities will only accept a limited amount of correction from any given source, which varies by source and by community. One of the behaviors that's likely to earn repeated negative feedback is trying to change the community more than allowed by one's standing within the community.