←back to thread

Two HN Announcements

(blog.ycombinator.com)
698 points tilt | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.739s | source
Show context
raldi ◴[] No.10298588[source]
> If we notice abusive vouches, we'll take away vouching rights

That might scare some people away from vouching. Could you clarify whether it'll be more like, "If you wrongly vouch for even one single thing, we'll silently and permanently remove your vouching ability forever with no possible recourse" or more like, "If you show a repeated pattern of bad vouching, we'll reach out to you and explain what you're doing wrong, and only if it continues, take away your vouching privileges as a last resort, perhaps only temporarily" (or somewhere in between those extremes)?

P.S. I couldn't be happier to hear about Dan's promotion. He has an expert touch for community management, and (I learned after an opportunity to join him for beers one night) some deep wisdom on the subject, too.

replies(3): >>10298625 #>>10298648 #>>10298968 #
dang ◴[] No.10298648[source]
Please don't worry about this. It really is just like flagging. We only take away flagging rights if someone repeatedly misuses them—never for one random thing.

I wouldn't have even included the bit about taking away vouching rights except I know that the question "What if people just vouch for all the bad comments" was going to come up otherwise.

(Also, I don't think I've been promoted? But thanks—that's particularly meaningful coming from a seasoned veteran of the early Reddit...)

replies(6): >>10298687 #>>10298761 #>>10298834 #>>10299345 #>>10300168 #>>10304498 #
debacle ◴[] No.10300168[source]
How would I know if I've lost flagging rights? Would excessive flagging cause that? Some days I might flag half a dozen things on the front page.

Do you think we could maybe work towards removing hellbanning/shadowbanning of site features for non-spam users at some point?

replies(1): >>10301007 #
1. nightpool ◴[] No.10301007[source]
When your flagging rights go away, the link disappears. St that point you can reach out to the mod team to try to figure out why/if it was a mistake.
replies(1): >>10301276 #
2. ◴[] No.10301276[source]