|
|
|
|
|
by mdhb
421 days ago
|
|
It’s an awfully convenient bit of wording where nobody can pin you down on exactly what that means but only on what actions get taken. It’s what I’m referring to when I say that I’ve never once seen a moderator once consider their own judgement when presented with feedback. It’s always the same line. Things are running exactly as intended from your point of view it would seem. |
|
If you have an example of a moderation action that you disagreed with (E.g., a particular story about DOGE or the administration that wasn't adequately discussed on HN), please share a link or something else concrete and we'll explain it or investigate it. You can post it here or email us (we have had email threads going back years with users who want to share feedback and learn about how we think about these things [1]).
There are plenty of ways of examining the data:
- https://github.com/HackerNews/API
- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40644563
- https://hn.algolia.com/
- https://news.ycombinator.com/front
If you have concerns about any future stories being hidden, you could set up your own API listener, monitor for new stories and then see which ones are flagged or killed.
For the record, I routinely undertake practices for evaluating and improving my own judgement, and am happy to do so regarding any specific case. But you haven't provided me with any specific feedback to respond to.
[1] https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-silicon-valley/th...