6 ms·

@dang what happened to this post? It was at the top like 30 mins ago and now it seems shadow-banned.

tomhow 1y ago
It was flagged by community members and downweighted (correctly) by a moderator for being a dupe: Whistleblower details how DOGE may have taken sensitive NLRB data – https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43691142 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43691142 1139 points/7 days ago/528 comments
- mfkp 1y ago
  It's a separate writeup by a separate author though, and with 500+ comments, it still seems relevant. From #1 on HN to completely disappeared. Bring it back, I say.
  - dang 1y ago
    On HN, dupeness is more a question of whether the underlying story is substantively the same or not—or, to put it slightly differently, whether the follow-up submission is able to support a substantively different discussion or not. In this case, the answers appear to be yes, it's substantively the same story, and no, it can't support a substantively different discussion than the previous major thread. That's why we'd treat the follow-up submission as a dupe. This is in no way passing judgment about the importance of the story! It's just that if we weren't careful and proactive about moderating HN in this way, the frontpage would rapidly fill up with variations on the hottest stories of the moment, and avoiding repetition is a core principle here (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=curiosity%20repetition%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...). I wrote a long explanation about exactly this the other day—if you (or anyone) is willing to take a look at that (assuming you have the stamina) and still have a question that isn't already answered there, I'd be happy to take a crack at it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43738815 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43738815. p.s. The current case is unfortunate because the follow-up/duplicate post came a week later than the original thread. If it were hours later, or a day or two later, as is more typical, we would merge the threads and in this way avoid a split discussion. But 7 days is too wide a chasm to merge across.
    - mfkp 1y ago
      I suppose it's just a bit frustrating that HN is one of the few places left on the internet where we can have a mostly civilized discussion about politics. I had missed the discussion from 7 days ago so this was news to me (and I'm sure most of the other commenters). If you miss the one chance to discuss that one topic, it can never be discussed again on HN. I'm not opposed to this rule for moderation, and I understand the reasoning behind it. But it seems like we're just watching the country burn and when stories like this get suppressed to make room for a new rust package manager, it makes me all nihilistic. /rant
      - dang 1y ago
        > it can never be discussed again on HN For sure it can, if and when significant new information arises. That's the main point of the principles outlined at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43738815 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43738815. But yes, I hear you and I know it's frustrating. There's no important topic that HN really does justice to.
      - dredmorbius 1y ago
        As one who shares your frustrations: working with the HN system, and pushing back where you feel it's appropriate, are both productive. Dang (and earlier pg and sctb, and now I suspect tomhow) often express frustrations with the HN community's collective behaviour (a recent example: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43477305 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43477305>). A key consideration is the fragility of the community and service itself (socially, not technically), as evidenced by, say, <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23047709 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23047709>, and even more revealingly here: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22805993 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22805993>. Your argument is likely not with their beliefs or preferences, but the embodied practices of HN moderation. Which can themselves be problematic as they have a strong status quo bias, as I've pointed out repeatedly: <https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=by%3Adredmorbius%20status%20quo%20bias&sort=byPopularity&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...>. Which often manifests as tone policing, as again I've commented (some overlap with above search): <https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adredmorbius%20tone%20policing&sort=byPopularity&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...> Consider reversing that bias a hacking challenge.

It was flagged by community members and downweighted (correctly) by a moderator for being a dupe: Whistleblower details how DOGE may have taken sensitive NLRB data – https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43691142 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43691142 1139 points/7 days ago/528 comments

mfkp 1y ago
It's a separate writeup by a separate author though, and with 500+ comments, it still seems relevant. From #1 on HN to completely disappeared. Bring it back, I say.
- dang 1y ago
  On HN, dupeness is more a question of whether the underlying story is substantively the same or not—or, to put it slightly differently, whether the follow-up submission is able to support a substantively different discussion or not. In this case, the answers appear to be yes, it's substantively the same story, and no, it can't support a substantively different discussion than the previous major thread. That's why we'd treat the follow-up submission as a dupe. This is in no way passing judgment about the importance of the story! It's just that if we weren't careful and proactive about moderating HN in this way, the frontpage would rapidly fill up with variations on the hottest stories of the moment, and avoiding repetition is a core principle here (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=curiosity%20repetition%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...). I wrote a long explanation about exactly this the other day—if you (or anyone) is willing to take a look at that (assuming you have the stamina) and still have a question that isn't already answered there, I'd be happy to take a crack at it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43738815 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43738815. p.s. The current case is unfortunate because the follow-up/duplicate post came a week later than the original thread. If it were hours later, or a day or two later, as is more typical, we would merge the threads and in this way avoid a split discussion. But 7 days is too wide a chasm to merge across.
  - mfkp 1y ago
    I suppose it's just a bit frustrating that HN is one of the few places left on the internet where we can have a mostly civilized discussion about politics. I had missed the discussion from 7 days ago so this was news to me (and I'm sure most of the other commenters). If you miss the one chance to discuss that one topic, it can never be discussed again on HN. I'm not opposed to this rule for moderation, and I understand the reasoning behind it. But it seems like we're just watching the country burn and when stories like this get suppressed to make room for a new rust package manager, it makes me all nihilistic. /rant
    - dang 1y ago
      > it can never be discussed again on HN For sure it can, if and when significant new information arises. That's the main point of the principles outlined at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43738815 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43738815. But yes, I hear you and I know it's frustrating. There's no important topic that HN really does justice to.
    - dredmorbius 1y ago
      As one who shares your frustrations: working with the HN system, and pushing back where you feel it's appropriate, are both productive. Dang (and earlier pg and sctb, and now I suspect tomhow) often express frustrations with the HN community's collective behaviour (a recent example: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43477305 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43477305>). A key consideration is the fragility of the community and service itself (socially, not technically), as evidenced by, say, <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23047709 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23047709>, and even more revealingly here: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22805993 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22805993>. Your argument is likely not with their beliefs or preferences, but the embodied practices of HN moderation. Which can themselves be problematic as they have a strong status quo bias, as I've pointed out repeatedly: <https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=by%3Adredmorbius%20status%20quo%20bias&sort=byPopularity&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...>. Which often manifests as tone policing, as again I've commented (some overlap with above search): <https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adredmorbius%20tone%20policing&sort=byPopularity&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...> Consider reversing that bias a hacking challenge.