[forapurpose]

The amount of propaganda is damaging my experience here. Not unlike Facebook and other platforms, HN seems to resist discussing how its platform is being abused and how it damages user experience; users are forbidden from discussing it publicly (in fact, I hope this comment is on the ok side of the guidelines, as I'm not accusing anyone in particular). I'm confident that HN works on the issue, so perhaps my difficulty is with a lack of transparency (again, similar to Facebook) - we have no idea what is being done; we're in the dark. We can't trust that the content we see is in good faith; it's a constant frustration and struggle to read, and most of my time is spent on noise. Propaganda is the worst content; it's noise to the signal and it's worse than noise because it manipulates HN users; we also now know, if it wasn't clear before, that it's a danger to free, democratic society - which is not something abstract, but something that happens right here on HN.

The pattern I see, so often that it's predictable and a source of frustration: 1. It's easy to stay beneath the moderators' radar by sounding 'reasonable' (in fact, on other topics, that's an explicitly taught strategy to white supremacists [0], it's a well-established technique of propaganda going back decades if not centuries, and I expect that professional astroturfers in any domain have the same skills); 2. the astroturfers almost always appear; I expected to see many pro-China comments appear here, including from purported Kenyans / East Africans (I certainly wouldn't say all are propaganda, but the pattern over many discussions seems clear enough that it's predictable); 3. on issues about which few HN users have knowledge or expertise, such as this one, there aren't even many people who can rebut the astroturfers; it's one-sided.

EDIT: Major revisions; apologies to anyone who read an earlier draft.

[0] ... he presented himself as polite, articulate and interested in cultural politics, and though his views are abhorrent, he stated them all so laconically you might forget that he actually believes in the concept of a white ethnostate. And that’s the point: The genius of the new far right, if we could call it “genius,” has been their steadfast determination to blend into the larger fabric of society to such an extent that perhaps the only way you might see them as a problem is if you actually want to see them at all.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/03/magazine/FBI-charlottesvi...

[dang]

No, this is not on the "ok side of the guidelines"—it's a gross violation. They say, and for good reason: "Please don't impute astroturfing or shillage. That degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about it, email us and we'll look at the data." (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html) You did just the opposite. We've warned you about this before. We ban accounts that keep breaking the site guidelines, and if you keep doing this we will ban you.

No one is resisting discussion of abuse. We work against the abuse of Hacker News every day. When people raise concerns we look into it every time. The problem here is that you're inventing it out of whole cloth. What is the evidence? Some "pro-China comments" that "sound reasonable"? Someone expressing views you don't like is not evidence. People here have a wide range of backgrounds and therefore views.

In one sentence you project astroturfers out of purest imagination, and in the next are already talking about them as if they've been substantiated. That's the cheapest of internet cheap shots, it's poison to the community, and you can't post like this here.

General remark:

In the last few months this class of posts has migrated from "You're a Russian spy" and "how much did Putin pay you to post that" to "You're a Chinese shill". It's obviously the same phenomenon, and the fact that it swings so dramatically with political fashion already shows that this phenomenon is not factual, but mass-psychological.

There's an internet law that the probability of users accusing someone of astroturfing rises with the intensity with which they disagree with their view. I hope someone comes up with a pithy formulation and snappy name for it. Anyone?

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18762617 and marked it off-topic.

[forapurpose]

> In the last few months this class of posts have all migrated from "You're a Russian spy" and "how much did Putin pay you to post that" to "You're a Chinese shill".

You are confusing me with someone else. I posted none of those things.

> We've warned you about this before.

I don't think so, but maybe a long time ago. Again, I think you're confusing me with another user.

You mischaracterize my comment in many ways; specifically, I didn't ask you to address astroturfing in this discussion, but instead was making a point about my user experience; I wouldn't have a reason to follow the guideline about emailing you as I understood it (though I'm not an HN lawyer and don't want to be one). But more than that, I spoke politely and tried to address problems I have as a user, and tried to avoid violating any guidelines by not accusing anyone. I don't think I deserve attacks and unfounded personal accusations about my motivations introduced into my day; I don't see how the latter is ever appropriate or necessary. Just say, 'that's not allowed here, here is why, please don't do it.' If I make a mistake, I'll apologize and try not to do it again.

Happy holidays.

P.S. I'll edit my other recent comment, which in this context might be inflammatory.

[dang]

That sentence is a general observation about a large class of posts to HN and how they have been changing lately. I didn't mean you wrote all of them. To make that clearer, I've taken out the word "all" out and added "general remark" above.

[forapurpose]

Thanks. I still think you're thinking of someone else; please see my edit.

To be clear, I also think those remarks (accusing people of being shills) are a problem; I didn't think I made one, though I'll stay even further away from them.

[kolikotime]

This seems as if its pointed at me. I will say that I find it sad that modern discourse has reached such a sad state that we suspect everyone who has a nonconformist opinion of being a bot/robot/astroturfer.

All I will say is that I am no lover of China. Chinese civilization, like Western civilization has exhibited anti-black tendencies and attitudes. The Chinese are great lovers of African markets, but not African people.

I do encourage you though to try to understand the African perspective on this issue, as well as other related issues that you may not generally understand before you try to characterize it as propaganda. Modern Africa is in a state of flux and deeply in need of infrastructure. There are many who say there are heavy costs to Chinese built infrastructure in Africa, Those same analysts will not reflect on the severe costs currently to Africa of its lack of infrastructures. The absence of intra-regional rail, highways, of connected electricity grids, of pipes and pipelines. If the West is truly concerned about African welfare, they can always step to the fore with their own expansive infrastructure agenda, but they largely won't, and we all know the reason why.

[forapurpose]

It was not pointed at you or at anyone; it was a comment about my general experience as an HN user. I didn't realize that your account existed before you replied. My motives and knowledge, including about Africa (a word I personally wouldn't use for a very large and diverse area), are not what you assume; please don't attribute things to me.

FWIW, Western analysts have talked about the problems of Sub-Saharan African infrastructure extensively and for a long time, and the West has attempted to fund it. IIRC, generally it has been found that foreign-built and -funded infrastructure projects fail, due to problems like corruption, rule of law issues, lack of involvement by local communities, lack of understanding by foreign funders, and lack of capacity for maintenance. As an analogy, you can't just drop an infrastructure project on a country any more than you can just drop an ERP system on a company; the company has to be ready, have capabilities, and needs a lot of highly effective consulting if you want a chance of success. The West's prior attempts at funding led to a massive 'debt trap' for many poor countries, making debt relief a major priority (and one that was resolved to a large extent). As I understand it, the predominant view now is that developing local capabilities, including building institutions and functioning government, is a necessary precursor to things like infrastructure. Kenya's problem with the port, on its surface, would seem to be a repeat of the old development pitfalls.