Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I'm cautiously optimistic about this, but the reference to "inappropriate comments" gives me pause. I'm reminded of this analysis [1]:

We have such labels [for heresy] today, of course, quite a lot of them, from the all-purpose "inappropriate" to the dreaded "divisive." In any period, it should be easy to figure out what such labels are, simply by looking at what people call ideas they disagree with besides untrue. When a politician says his opponent is mistaken, that's a straightforward criticism, but when he attacks a statement as "divisive" or "racially insensitive" instead of arguing that it's false, we should start paying attention.

Especially when paired with coded language like "historically marginalized users" (I'm pretty sure Sam isn't talking about Republicans here [2]), targeting "inappropriate comments" suggests that Hacker News it at risk of becoming a progressive echo-chamber. (Of course, there are those [3] who fret that HN is insufficiently progressive, but the same people probably think Harvard and the New York Times aren't progressive enough, either.) I can understand flagging uncivil comments, but "inappropriate" comments? I'm not even sure what that means. Please proceed with caution.

[1]: http://paulgraham.com/say.html

[2]: If you don't think tech is hostile to Republicans, you've probably never been a Republican in tech. Indeed, who's more underrepresented in tech: women, or Romney voters? (Note: I didn't vote for Romney, and I am not now nor have I ever been a member of the Republican party.)

[2]: See, e.g., https://twitter.com/shit_hn_says.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: