[ScottWhigham]

i believe this apparent abuse of the spam ‘flagging’ feature on HN is seriously detrimental to the community.

Like DanBC said, flagging is just for spam. And really - "abuse" is just hyperbole, isn't it? And while we're talking about hyperbole, your whole title is just flag-worthy for the dramatics alone.

If, for example, a post gets 447 upvotes, how many flags constitute "flagging abuse" in your mind? For something to get 447 upvotes means that (a) a large portion of the community saw the headline, and (b) a large portion of the community read the article (or at least part). What makes you think that it is "abuse" if a portion of said Group B decided to flag it as "off topic" or "bad journalism" (or whatever - I didn't flag it but, like others have said, I can see how and why some people would)?

You're acting as though flagging should have no weight on ranking. Why not make your case and put up a poll in a new thread? I'd suggest leaving out a fair bit of the dramatics you've created this post with though...

[vaultboy21]

from: http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

If you think something is spam or offtopic, flag it by going to its page and clicking on the "flag" link. (Not all users will see this; there is a karma threshold.) If you flag something, please don't also comment that you did.

..the guidelines clearly specify flagging is for spam or off-topic posts. i generally define 'abuse' as utilizing a feature for something that its not intended for, such as burying a story one does not agree with.

saying its 'off topic' is total bs. issues involving standards, ip, public access, etc.. (also, involving two of the largest tech companies, the mobile space, a popular web-based product, etc...), seem to be very relevant around here and frequently come-up.

so.. this wasn't spam or off-topic, yet shows heavy flag activity. that indicates abuse to me. would 'misuse' be better? - its petty of you to dismiss my point as being 'dramatic'. i attempted to frame the issue as i saw it, using the evidence i was able to scrape-together, and tried to avoid making generalizations or turning it into a 'hn hates microsoft' or whatever as i'm sure this happens often, but this case highlighted it most clearly, and most recently..

[ScottWhigham]

its petty of you to dismiss my point as being 'dramatic'.

No, sorry, that's not true. I wasn't the one who judged your original post - the one that was killed (by flagging) within minutes. Those people judged your post as hyperbole/dramatic/whatever you want to call it as well. I'm judging this specific post, however, and it is dramatic both in it's content and certainly in it's language. The title is just silly - "Can we have an honest discussion about abusive flagging on HN?" (italics mine). What other discussion would we have other than an honest one?

"Abusive" is just a word chosen for effect; misuse, while definitely being less dramatic, still implies that the community is doing something wrong. I don't think most of us feel that way. I think most of us old timers flag for different reasons than the newbies. My suspicion is that a lot of the older members (who also have high karma) flagged your original post for the reasons I've mentioned. If I'd seen it, I would've flagged it (as I've flagged this one).