[fargle]

seconded. even if it was completely true criticism, which it categorically is not, putting up a half-page banner is extremely gauche and immature.

saying things like "an organized attempt to destroy lives, including of developers in our communities" is patently not true. trolls get flagged. honest nice people who don't agree with you aren't trying to destroy anything and nor do they hate you.

[follower]

I'm unsure whether the most charitable reading of your comment is to assume you missed that these linked phrases exist on the original site but were not included in the text copied into the comment above, or something else:

* "bad actors" links to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi_Farms

* "destroy lives" links to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi_Farms#Suicides_of_harassm...

While you may be correct that initial "trolls get flagged", the statement on the Asahi site agrees that while the initial comment may be flagged & killed, the other comments in the subthread are still indexed, visible & tend not to get moderated/flag:

"Unfortunately, when a comment is flagged and killed, its child subthread is not. [...] but the reduced moderation activity enables abuse to continue. Although you don't see those threads, search engines do."

Based on other remarks about the content of such subthreads it seems surprising to claim that follow-on comments are made by "honest nice people".

I'm as much of a fan of adverbs as the next person but using words like "categorically", "extremely" & "patently" doesn't seem to leave much room for nuance of interpretation when written by someone who I'd have assumed was a third party observer?

While I could understand someone describing JWZ's HN-tailored "banner" (I wouldn't suggest researching this if anyone is not already familiar) gauche and immature, it feels like somewhat of a stretch in relation to a plain text message who last sentence starts with "Please".

[CRConrad]

> I'm unsure whether the most charitable reading of your comment is to assume you missed that these linked phrases exist on the original site but were not included in the text copied into the comment above, or something else:

> * "bad actors" links to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi_Farms

> * "destroy lives" links to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi_Farms#Suicides_of_harassm...

As has already been pointed out, HN isn't "Kiwi Farms" (whatever that is), so WTF does that have to do with their whining specifically about HN???

> While you may be correct that initial "trolls get flagged", the statement on the Asahi site agrees that while the initial comment may be flagged & killed, the other comments in the subthread are still indexed, visible & tend not to get moderated/flag:

> "Unfortunately, when a comment is flagged and killed, its child subthread is not. [...] but the reduced moderation activity enables abuse to continue. Although you don't see those threads, search engines do."

And what's the problem with, I assume they mean, not all comments in subthreads of dead comments also being automatically killed? I read HN with "Show dead" on, so I get to see those with a simple click of "[... more]", and I usually open them. What I've found is that the absolute majority of these responses are sensible comments pointing out what's wrong with the original inappropriate comment.

So the "problem" they're complaining about is not only not a problem; it's actually the remedy for that exact issue. The banner is not only childishly whiny, but actually self-contradictory. In short, it's stupid.

[fargle]

disagree, strongly. kiwi-farms has nothing to do with hn. if kiwi-farms starts brigading and spamming/trolling on hn, it gets flagged.

> the other comments in the subthread are still indexed, visible & tend not to get moderated/flagged

indexed: please complain to google.

visible: not unless you turn on show-dead. so don't do that.

don't get moderated: they are already dead.

> I'm as much of a fan of adverbs

i mean what i said. i'm extremely tired of seeing histrionics and exaggerations, misplaced blame, etc. turned into loud, unfair, criticism toward what is probably the best moderated group i can think of.

JWZ's banner is at least recognizable as satire, and his opinions are well known. i can disagree with him, but still find it a little bit funny (and immature). but if you do the same thing (yes, with a please), then you are just exactly as mature. and if you are serious, less grounded in reality and not nearly as funny.