7 ms·

Stating that I feel a comment is astroturf is not a personal attack. It may be against the rules, and I will refrain from as such, but it is most certainly not

by burnte 12y ago

Stating that I feel a comment is astroturf is not a personal attack. It may be against the rules, and I will refrain from as such, but it is most certainly not a personal attack, it is a statement that I feel the _comment_ is disingenuous, and I said so in a light-hearted manner at that. The comment seemed over the top in its praise, and was not a teardown at all. Further, I see nothing in the rules about calling out astroturf, the closest I saw was about being civil, which I most certainly was. I pointed out the comment felt like astroturfing, and said absolutely nothing impolite, rude, or even slightly uncivil. I'm sorry you saw it otherwise. It was meant to be a lighthearded poke, hence the ebay-style comment at the end.

dang 12y ago
I believe you that you didn't mean it that way, but that's a sign of how easy it is to convey things you don't mean, such as that a person is deliberately lying and being paid for it. The negative effect of a comment like that is probably a hundred times greater than the maximum one would ever imagine when posting it. And it only takes a few to poison the discourse. The biggest problem with trying to hold this site to the HN guidelines is that most violations are unintentional. Obvious trolling is easier to deal with. If you're curious about our reasoning re astroturfing, follow the links back from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9277068 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9277068. I've posted about it quite a bit.
- burnte 12y ago
  I think that should be in the actual guidelines as linked at the bottom of the main page.
  - dang 12y ago
    The guidelines don't try to be an exhaustive list of rules.
    - burnte 11y ago
      That's fine, but I think "no astroturfing nor accusations of astroturfing" wouldn't burden the rule list unnecessarily. Given HN's status in this industry, this is a prime locale for personal politics to creep into comments, and making clear that aspect won't be tolerated would only benefit the community, and would remove room for debate about that rule. Just a suggestion.
jlarocco 12y ago
I have to agree with burnte. The OP is brown nosing so hard it definitely looks like astro-turfing. Also, I disagree that calling out astroturfing is a violation of the HN rules/guidelines. I can think of several recent threads where people have called out astroturfing and NOT been flagged and punished, and have actually been voted up. If nothing else, such an accusation should be refuted with evidence to the contrary, rather than getting flagged and removed.
- dang 12y ago
  Of course such accusations get voted up: they stoke indignation, which invariably gets voted up. That's a weakness of the voting system, not evidence of fairness. HN can't go by upvotes alone. Accusing someone of deliberately faking their comments in order to co-opt discussion for an external interest is so far beyond the pale of civility that I'm not sure what else to tell you. It's my job to interpret the guidelines. That is the interpretation.
  - jlarocco 12y ago
    I guess it's just a little odd how the HN moderators are quick defending millionaire VC Marc Andreessen, but have had nothing to say when others have been accused of astroturfing. In the other cases, it's been enough to let the voting system do its work, but in this particular case, the mods are quick to point out the weaknesses of the voting system and accuse nay sayers of lacking civility.
    - dang 12y ago
      There may be a bit of sample bias here. Some recent comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9360470 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9360470 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9277068 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9277068 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9226682 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9226682 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9180466 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9180466 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9122086 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9122086 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9116181 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9116181 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9116049 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9116049 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9115965 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9115965 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9082641 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9082641 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8989514 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8989514 It's true that we don't catch everything; we don't see everything. If you or anyone would like to help, we'd be grateful. Gently reminding users not to break the guidelines is one way. Emailing us (hn@ycombinator.com) when you see them being broken is another.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
throwaway54483 12y ago
dang is absolutely right and your comment should be downvoted to oblivion. Because if you look, beenpoor made the exact same comment but without couching it in your poisonous language. benpoor wrote: >Man, you should tone down your reverence :) Which is the same thing in civil terms. (Per the guidelines, something you could say to someone you were having a personal conversation with face-to-face.) For what it's worth, I found numair's comment (GGP you replied to) very worthwhile, I appreciated the time that he took to write it, and was wondering if he was correct! Elsewhere in this thread another commenter, dunkelheit, above wrote "I .. doubt that depictions of the workings of VC firms from this article should be taken at face value." So, we have dunkelheit wondering if it should be taken at face value, we have numair basically stating that he thinks it does: "The behind-the-scenes look at Instacart's latest funding round was really interesting...Again, such an honest look at the inner workings of Andreesen and his colleagues." We have a lot of readers here who can clear up whether numair is correct that this is an accurate and honest look. We have readers who know Marc personally. I guarantee that you will not elicit them to share their thoughts with what you wrote. Instead you could have simply written, "This is so lavishly praising I wonder whether you have been funded by A16z. Do you have a disclosure to make?" As it stands, your comment completely derailed the thread. This is why it should simply have been killed and hidden without any discussion, not due to the content but the exact form you chose to express it in.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

by burnte 12y ago

dang 12y ago

I believe you that you didn't mean it that way, but that's a sign of how easy it is to convey things you don't mean, such as that a person is deliberately lying and being paid for it. The negative effect of a comment like that is probably a hundred times greater than the maximum one would ever imagine when posting it. And it only takes a few to poison the discourse. The biggest problem with trying to hold this site to the HN guidelines is that most violations are unintentional. Obvious trolling is easier to deal with. If you're curious about our reasoning re astroturfing, follow the links back from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9277068 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9277068. I've posted about it quite a bit.

burnte 12y ago
I think that should be in the actual guidelines as linked at the bottom of the main page.
- dang 12y ago
  The guidelines don't try to be an exhaustive list of rules.
  - burnte 11y ago
    That's fine, but I think "no astroturfing nor accusations of astroturfing" wouldn't burden the rule list unnecessarily. Given HN's status in this industry, this is a prime locale for personal politics to creep into comments, and making clear that aspect won't be tolerated would only benefit the community, and would remove room for debate about that rule. Just a suggestion.

jlarocco 12y ago

I have to agree with burnte. The OP is brown nosing so hard it definitely looks like astro-turfing. Also, I disagree that calling out astroturfing is a violation of the HN rules/guidelines. I can think of several recent threads where people have called out astroturfing and NOT been flagged and punished, and have actually been voted up. If nothing else, such an accusation should be refuted with evidence to the contrary, rather than getting flagged and removed.

dang 12y ago
Of course such accusations get voted up: they stoke indignation, which invariably gets voted up. That's a weakness of the voting system, not evidence of fairness. HN can't go by upvotes alone. Accusing someone of deliberately faking their comments in order to co-opt discussion for an external interest is so far beyond the pale of civility that I'm not sure what else to tell you. It's my job to interpret the guidelines. That is the interpretation.
- jlarocco 12y ago
  I guess it's just a little odd how the HN moderators are quick defending millionaire VC Marc Andreessen, but have had nothing to say when others have been accused of astroturfing. In the other cases, it's been enough to let the voting system do its work, but in this particular case, the mods are quick to point out the weaknesses of the voting system and accuse nay sayers of lacking civility.
  - dang 12y ago
    There may be a bit of sample bias here. Some recent comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9360470 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9360470 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9277068 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9277068 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9226682 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9226682 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9180466 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9180466 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9122086 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9122086 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9116181 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9116181 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9116049 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9116049 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9115965 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9115965 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9082641 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9082641 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8989514 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8989514 It's true that we don't catch everything; we don't see everything. If you or anyone would like to help, we'd be grateful. Gently reminding users not to break the guidelines is one way. Emailing us (hn@ycombinator.com) when you see them being broken is another.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

throwaway54483 12y ago

dang is absolutely right and your comment should be downvoted to oblivion. Because if you look, beenpoor made the exact same comment but without couching it in your poisonous language. benpoor wrote: >Man, you should tone down your reverence :) Which is the same thing in civil terms. (Per the guidelines, something you could say to someone you were having a personal conversation with face-to-face.) For what it's worth, I found numair's comment (GGP you replied to) very worthwhile, I appreciated the time that he took to write it, and was wondering if he was correct! Elsewhere in this thread another commenter, dunkelheit, above wrote "I .. doubt that depictions of the workings of VC firms from this article should be taken at face value." So, we have dunkelheit wondering if it should be taken at face value, we have numair basically stating that he thinks it does: "The behind-the-scenes look at Instacart's latest funding round was really interesting...Again, such an honest look at the inner workings of Andreesen and his colleagues." We have a lot of readers here who can clear up whether numair is correct that this is an accurate and honest look. We have readers who know Marc personally. I guarantee that you will not elicit them to share their thoughts with what you wrote. Instead you could have simply written, "This is so lavishly praising I wonder whether you have been funded by A16z. Do you have a disclosure to make?" As it stands, your comment completely derailed the thread. This is why it should simply have been killed and hidden without any discussion, not due to the content but the exact form you chose to express it in.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]