strange most of the top level comments are arguing against either net neutrality, or this campaign.
On a site that is otherwise extremely strongly for net neutrality.
Nothing suspicious about that...
On a site that is otherwise extremely strongly for net neutrality.
Nothing suspicious about that...
Readers are far too quick to misinterpret disagreement as sinister bad faith, presumably because we all think our own view is so obvious that only someone dishonest could disagree. In reality, it's just that the world has a lot of things in it.
I mean look at stuff like this
https://www.fiverr.com/gigs/reddit
http://www.hack-pr.com/library/how-we-hacked-reddit-to-gener...
https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/10/15610744/anti-net-neutral...
This is the reality, PR firms are on overdrive on social media sites about issues that are politically sensitive. Its irresponsible NOT to question the motives of commenters.
I mean surely as an HN moderator you have seen more than a few shady situations.
HN is extremely politically influential in the tech sphere, pg has said himself that its the subject of campaigns like this.
we can not afford to ignore this problem.
https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&prefix=true&page=0&dateR...
Both choices suck, but what the hell are we supposed to do exactly? Let these clowns win?
The problem with what you're saying above is that you don't have any way to distinguish "such things" from what merely look like "such things". There are many more of the latter, and there are plenty of HN users who feel the same way as you but who see a completely different set of posts as "such things". If we take the union of all those sets it amounts to most of what gets posted to HN. Just imagine everybody with such perceptions doing a j'accuse on everybody else with such perceptions; this would destroy the community much more quickly than astroturfing ever could. So we all have to be disciplined about this—vigilant, sure, but also disciplined in how we react to what we think we see. I like a thing that Rilke said: Doubt, but turn your doubt also upon itself.
We could send emails to hn@ycombinator.com , but the thing is that I don't know how long it would take for us to get any feedback -- as presumably, this is largely a manual investigation on the mod's part; and I don't know how many such emails a mod would receive in a day...and during all this time of waiting for feedback or a possible action, a regular user engaging in a discussion might have to bear all the attacks and gaslighting -- and sometimes the attacker(s) could be quite insidious...
For instance, I used to have another new account, which had very little karma points...And after making a few comments for the first time, one of which contained some discussion about the censorship by the Chinese government ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14742211 ) -- then two of my other comments (relatively neutral and containing nothing about Chinese government or so), which I did not think were aggressive or factually erroneous, soon had been downvoted multiple times. As a result, my karma points dropped sharply, and my account was soon forbidden by the system to make any new comment for some time (basically, it had been DoS'ed)...
I still do not know at this time if there was any intentional manipulation behind that case...
Well, I could have reported the incident, as a possible malicious DoS attack on my account, to the mod -- but I was also banned by the system at the time and could not continue with the discussion for a while...Or I could register another new account...The thing is, it is just getting quite uninteresting and discouraging for people who want to have some real discussion to stay on...
I have to say that I don't know a better solution, as in such similar situations, than sending complaints to the mod...but I just feel that perhaps this solution is still not enough to fix the whole problem...
======================
Edit 1:
I just looked it up and found that gaslighting is indeed an attack vector:
a form of manipulation that seeks to sow seeds of doubt
in a targeted individual or members of a group, hoping
to make targets question their own memory, perception,
and sanity. Using persistent denial, misdirection,
contradiction, and lying, it attempts to destabilize
the target and delegitimize the target's belief.
Just look at America in this post-911 era -- the real cost of that attack to our society has been several magnitudes greater than the cost of the original damage...