Hacker News Reader

Comment by bheadmaster | Hacker News Reader

I assume you're talking about this comment:

    We need an alt-right version of AI like we need a pumpkin spice sushiccino. No thanks but no thanks.

It was flagged because it is against HN guidelines [0], in particular these ones:

    Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet tropes.
    Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

View on HN

You commented on my opinion that it's "impossible to have a level discussion." You asked me if I tried commenting, and I answered you.

What motivated my opinion is not just whether my comment deserved flagging or not (and I see a lot of comments that may be more deserving of it by the logic you quoted.) It's the fact that it got downvoted and flagged almost instantly.

you were asked if you tried to have a level discussion, to which you should have answered “no”

Even in an alt-right delusional doublethink universe, answering "no" would have been false.

A level discussion means one where criticism is allowed. It doesn't mean a discussion in which everyone gives a white-glove treatment to yet another useless chatbot, while ignoring the alt-right elephant in the room out of an abundance of courtesy.

You won't ever convince the people here that having your comment sent into the gray is detrimental. Not to mention the 1-9-90 rule[0], meaning 90% of people don't even understand how annoying it is to have a good comment sent into the gray.

According to to them, getting your comment grayed out means its still technically there, so you aren't getting censored by the bandwagon.

They fail to understand that graying out your comment signals to the cursory viewer that it is a low quality comment. Whereas often it is not. You might comment something that is factually right, but goes against HN's vibe du jour, so you get one or two downvotes, and then the larger group starts mass-clicking ▼ without any critical thought.

A much more healthy system would just be sorting comments by vote activity and percentage-positive. It would still make controversial comments slightly less visible, but because there is not explicit signal of quality, no bandwagon effects.

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1%25_rule

> 90% of people don't even understand how annoying it is to have a good comment sent into the gray

Even if 90% of users are lurkers it doesn't mean they don't know how it feels to be downvoted and can't emphasize.

Good comments are rarely downvoted disproportionately on HN. Perceived censorship "by the bandwagon" just means it isn't a good comment.

> Perceived censorship "by the bandwagon" just means it isn't a good comment.

It just means you said something that goes against the grain of the larger part of HN. Nothing more.

But as stated, you people are inconvincible.

I think it is more nuanced, because the majority of HN is voting on the quality of the argument rather the alignment of ideas. If you present a well reasoned contrarian idea, I don't think you would gather a lot of downvotes.

What gets downvoted are the really bad takes with lazy arguments.

You assumed that the reason you were flagged is because there is an army of Musk fans flagging anyone who is disagreeing with their opinions.

I have provided alternative reasoning on why your comment was flagged, which doesn't rest on the former assumption.

> It's the fact that it got downvoted and flagged almost instantly.

HN is a popular site, and you might have commented during peak hours. I think that is a more reasonable explanation.

In my experience, HN is generally anti-Musk, so it is odd for me to see someone asserting the opposite.

I answered your question honestly. You don't have to agree with my assumption or opinion. What matters (for the argument at hand) is if the facts were minimally enough to justify my opinion. You hinted that I might be giving up without trying to post, which was not the case.

> In my experience, HN is generally anti-Musk

I agree with this. I found the early moderation on this comment section to be suspiciously pro-Musk on a site that usually isn't.

> What matters (for the argument at hand) is if the facts were minimally enough to justify my opinion.

They were not. You were downvoted because you broke the rules of site, therefore there's no evidence of Elon Muskery. Try to have a discussion without breaking the rules first.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com