Comment by king_magic | Hacker News Reader

Comment by king_magic | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I'm not going to refute the author, merely, here is my experience: I've done CF for 2+ years, and frankly, I've gotten a lot out of it. I like/trust my coaches, I like the community, and I like the challenge. I never thought I'd be capable of what I can do these days, and so for me, it's a success story.

I go twice a week, and have been doing so (roughly) for the past two years, except for a period of a few months where I had a hernia repaired. The origins of the hernia were 5-6 years old, and it never was very painful or caused much in the way of problems, and I actually think that a year of CF actually helped reduce the severity of it (and my surgeon agrees).

Thess days, I take things much easier, but am still making progress against my personal goals.

So at the end of the day, does the author have valid points? Sure. But I think, like pretty much everything people are passionately for or against on the internet, the truth is in a gray area. It's not as black and white as I think the author is making it out to be.

CrossFit has helped a lot of people, myself included. CrossFit hasn't helped some people who have tried it.

You could replace "CrossFit" with "college" (or a lot of other things in life), and I think you'd find that again, the truth is really in a gray area, somewhere in between the opposing factions.

I don't get the moderation here at HN these days. Currently, the comment I'm replying to has been voted down, and I can't for the life of me figure out why.

The content seems very reasonable, informative and detailed to me, even if it may partially contradict the submission's article. It gave me a different perspective on the issue, which I find useful. I see absolutely no reason why it should be greyed out.

I wouldn't be surprised if it ends up getting voted up soon enough, too. It's just disappointing to see so many totally legitimate and valid comments ending up in this state these days.

I would assume it's because of this line:

You could replace "CrossFit" with "college" (or a lot of other things in life)

That's just an absurd statement. It implies that the problem is you - your over-training, or your inability to do the right things. But in CrossFit or in college, you are following a prescribed path someone else laid out. The author points out how the cult of CrossFit promotes blind following WOD/et al. So no - you can't replace CrossFit with college in this case and suggesting so implies that he/she did not truly read the article.

"You could replace "CrossFit" with "college" (or a lot of other things in life), and I think you'd find that again, the truth is really in a gray area, somewhere in between the opposing factions."

That is the entire sentence I wrote. Please, don't cherry pick (on the topic of not truly reading things). I'm making a statement about the nature of controversial things, where there are conflicting viewpoints. Often times both sides have valid points, despite being wildly opposed to each other.

Replace "college" in my statement with "politics". Or "medical studies". Or "emacs vs. vi". Same thing - the truth it somewhere in the middle.

I think the comparison is much more valid that you're making it out to be.

There's just as much "blind following" in many college programs as there may be in CrossFit, or even religion. Questioning what you're taught, or how you're taught it, or even the methods you've been told to use while learning the material, is tantamount to academic "death". So we see a lot of people just go along with it to avoid low marks or other forms of retribution they may face if they question the system. This can even cause physical and mental hardship for some people.

But I don't see how it isn't the participant's fault if the participant can't or won't say, "This could unreasonably harm me; I'm not doing it.", and then keeps participating to the point of harm taking place.

We're talking about something that they're voluntarily doing, after all. If these people lack the judgment to know what their boundaries are, and when they might be exceeding them, then I don't see how anyone but the participants are responsible for any harm that may happen. Nobody but the participant, regardless of whether they're participating in college or physical training, is responsible if the participant lacks the self control to stop engaging in a completely voluntary, yet harmful, behavior.

That's not moderation, that's user voting. And it is simply corrected by up voting.

Downvotes are common and are sometimes accidental. Upvote, or ignore, and move on.

It is a form of moderation. It may not be as extreme as outright deletion, but it does make the comment harder to read, which is a mild form of censorship.

And, yes, I'm aware of why it can happen, and how one can deal with it. It's just a trend that's getting far worse than I remember it being. There was one Python submission I saw yesterday where probably 1/3rd of the comments were greyed out when I viewed it. It becomes distracting, and makes it harder to read the comments.

I usually end up reading them anyway, since so much legitimate and valuable content is now shown in grey so often. It defeats the purpose of displaying comments like that when so much good content has so frequently been mis-voted down.

It's probably because you can find testimonials for every fitness program ever on the internet, from Crossfit to Himalaya Spiritual yoga (I made that up).

In fact, you can find testimonials for everything on the internet. They are all a bunch of "this worked for me" and they offer absolutely no insight.

It started to happen when a moderator came out of the shadow encouraging users to downvote comments they don't agree to. So here we are now, reddit without a reddiquette.

I try to do the opposite (although I fail at times to) - downvoting for simply disagreement amounts to squelching dissent on a whim. If you downvote, at least a response as to why would be good. Otherwise, it amounts to communal censorship.

I'm not a fan of voting systems that let you downvote in general though.

If you reply to a comment you downvoted, the downvote doesn't count, which discourages people from explaining why they downvoted.

Downvotes are sometimes useful for getting users to fight spam. One interesting solution I encountered on lobste.rs is to ask for a reason (out of a small list) before allowing me to downvote. It sure stopped me from censoring stuff that I find annoying.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com