Yes in the sense that users flagged it, but not in the sense that moderators penalized it. I didn't see it until someone emailed a couple minutes ago.
The only thing I've done since then is mark the post so it won't be killed by excessive user flags. This means the thread can stay open for new comments.
I'm not going to remove the flags, because they are clearly an authentic community reaction, though of course some users will have the opposite reaction as well; this is normal.
Wouldn't excessive/above average flagging rather indicate a post is controversial/counter narrative enough to warrant longer front page exposure? It certainly seems to have gotten the people going in the short time it was up, and it's not a secret that early vocal users can be quite generous with the flag button.
IMHO, for fairness, upvotes should be the vouches countering the flags. I think unless the amount of flags is really significant, they shouldn't have priority over the 117 upvoters (and counting) who are clearly interested to have this discussion here.
My thinking could be naïve, as the algorithms were probably created with the backing of some data and experience, but anyway, I felt like sharing my opinion.
Flags having a stronger influence than upvoting is a necessary algorithmic check against genuinely bad behavior/brigading, not disagreement. In general it works as intended, which is the best you can do without something potentially worse.
Are there any stats available on the weighting ratios such as flags to upvotes, likes and comments per post after flagging, average time to frontpage to flag?
(G summarises the following[0], but a definitive source would clear up what the necessary algorithmic checks are).
In a real tug-of-war, the teams are balanced. In the HN tug-of-war, flaggers have an advantage because flagged posts are invisible to people who might otherwise upvote them.
I'd hazard that someone is waiting-not-waiting, like Smaug, for a systems quant (bonus: lisper) to enter the cave to do equilibrium teleportation experiments on votes and flags
(I am secretly hoping that this is a silent-smoke-out-of-ears --and not self-extinguishing-- comment)
Almost any moderation system working under consistent rules will be stable, because the people and topics disadvantaged by the moderation will simply leave your platform.
Exactly correct! That is the principle: <a href="https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=by%3Adang%20moderate%20%22less%2C%20not%20more%22&sort=byDate&type=comment" rel="nofollow">https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
I applied it in this case by preventing the thread from getting killed outright, which would have closed it to new comments. This is moderating less than we normally would, since any thread that is flagged this heavily would normally get killed.
It's important to understand that "moderating less" means moderating less than we normally do. It doesn't imply "not moderating at all", and certainly not "always override user flags". Those would be loopholes that any internet provocateur could drive a truck through, as I've mentioned from time to time over the years: <a href="https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20moderate%20%22less%2C%20not%20more%22%20loophole&sort=byDate&type=comment" rel="nofollow">https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
I'm curious - Do you have a reaction to the specfic point of suggestions that were brought to you, per the article? Do you recall specific ones, and if they were considered/deliberated?
Some community reactions are considered more authentic than others, it would seem.
I’ve seen so many shit articles and corporate announcements manually unflagged by the mods over the years. (Here’s a recent one, flagged to death very quickly before miraculously being resurrected: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49602728">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49602728) An explanation is rarely given.
kdavis · · focus · HN ↗
dang · · focus · HN ↗
The only thing I've done since then is mark the post so it won't be killed by excessive user flags. This means the thread can stay open for new comments.
I'm not going to remove the flags, because they are clearly an authentic community reaction, though of course some users will have the opposite reaction as well; this is normal.
dleeftink · · focus · HN ↗
jakobdabo · · focus · HN ↗
My thinking could be naïve, as the algorithms were probably created with the backing of some data and experience, but anyway, I felt like sharing my opinion.
minimaxir · · focus · HN ↗
dleeftink · · focus · HN ↗
Are there any stats available on the weighting ratios such as flags to upvotes, likes and comments per post after flagging, average time to frontpage to flag?
(G summarises the following[0], but a definitive source would clear up what the necessary algorithmic checks are).
[0]: <a href="https://share.google/aimode/cs9cKsvGMNRHs8OG1" rel="nofollow">https://share.google/aimode/cs9cKsvGMNRHs8OG1
dang · · focus · HN ↗
<a href="https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20%22tug%20of%20war%22&sort=byDate&type=comment" rel="nofollow">https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
timmytokyo · · focus · HN ↗
dang · · focus · HN ↗
We aren't opposed to tweaking and testing it, but the tweaks would need to be small.
oliculipolicula · · focus · HN ↗
I'd hazard that someone is waiting-not-waiting, like Smaug, for a systems quant (bonus: lisper) to enter the cave to do equilibrium teleportation experiments on votes and flags
(I am secretly hoping that this is a silent-smoke-out-of-ears --and not self-extinguishing-- comment)
esterna · · focus · HN ↗
dang · · focus · HN ↗
Loquebantur · · focus · HN ↗
A couple hours at least, would be my guess.
Sabinus · · focus · HN ↗
Teever · · focus · HN ↗
What's the reasoning for not having a vouch feature for stories like comments?
dang · · focus · HN ↗
GeoAtreides · · focus · HN ↗
<a href="https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=moderate%20less%20by%3Adang&sort=byDate&type=comment" rel="nofollow">https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
> we moderate HN less, not more, when YC or YC startups are the story, so I've refrained from doing that here.
dang · · focus · HN ↗
I applied it in this case by preventing the thread from getting killed outright, which would have closed it to new comments. This is moderating less than we normally would, since any thread that is flagged this heavily would normally get killed.
It's important to understand that "moderating less" means moderating less than we normally do. It doesn't imply "not moderating at all", and certainly not "always override user flags". Those would be loopholes that any internet provocateur could drive a truck through, as I've mentioned from time to time over the years: <a href="https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20moderate%20%22less%2C%20not%20more%22%20loophole&sort=byDate&type=comment" rel="nofollow">https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
unified101 · · focus · HN ↗
dang · · focus · HN ↗
archagon · · focus · HN ↗
I’ve seen so many shit articles and corporate announcements manually unflagged by the mods over the years. (Here’s a recent one, flagged to death very quickly before miraculously being resurrected: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49602728">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49602728) An explanation is rarely given.