I replied to the original tweet too ("what would you do if you were Jack Dorsey?"). I said I'd shut the whole thing down.
I replied to the original tweet too ("what would you do if you were Jack Dorsey?"). I said I'd shut the whole thing down.
Unfortunately, these extremely contradictory subjective images of HN seem to be a consequence of its structure, being non-siloed: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que.... This creates a paradox where precisely because the site is less divisive it feels more divisive—in the sense that it feels to people like it is dominated by their enemies, whoever their enemies may be. That's extremely bad for community, and I don't know what to do about it, other than post a version of this comment every time it comes up.
Thanks for caring about level-headeness, in any case.
I mean, I agree with you that we all have biases and blind spots in our perception. Which means... so do the mods. I comment because I want HN to continue to be a site that people like me want to comment on. The site that "people whose comments dang likes" want to comment on surely looks different.
But I think your explanation of why this is is much too simplistic. The difference seems to be that you aren't being bombarded every day with utterly contradictory extremely strong feelings about how awful it is. If you were, you wouldn't be able to write what you just posted. Your judgment that the perception "isn't symmetric" is wildly out of line with what I encounter here, so one of us must be dealing with an extremely skewed sample. Perhaps you read more HN posts and talk to a wider variety of people about HN than I do. From my perspective, the links below are typical—and there are countless more where these came from. Of course, there are also countless links claiming exactly the opposite, but since you already believe that, they aren't the medicine in this case. I sample that list when responding to commenters who see things this way:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23729568
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17197581
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23429442
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20438487
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15032682
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19471335
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15937781
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21627676
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15388778
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20956287
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15585780
https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=BetterThanSlave
https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=slamdance
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15307915
A sample email, for a change of pace: "It's clear ycombinator is clearly culling right-wing opinions and thoughts. The only opinions allowed to remain on the site are left wing [...] What a fucking joke your site has become."
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20202305
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18664482
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16397133
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15546533
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15752730
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20645202
If you see a comment complaining about "(Apple|Google|Microsoft) fanboys", that's much the same thing. The only actual information in such a comment is about the commenter—specifically, what they dislike (in this case, (Apple|Google|Microsoft)) and therefore what they notice and assigned greater weight to.
Such commenters routinely produce entirely opposite outputs about the exact same input set. Indeed their complaints are interchangeable except for the direction of bias they're complaining about. This phenomenon is so reliable that I'm not sure I've seen any more reliable phenomenon on HN. There is clearly a deep cognitive bias underlying it. I've done my best to try to explain what that is. I'd be interested in hearing other explanations, but so far most responses seem to deny the phenomenon, which from my perspective can't possibly be correct.
Where I think being a moderator makes a big difference is that we get bombarded with these contradictory complaints every day, often in personally abusive ways. You can't help but notice the contradictions when you're getting bashed for one reason one minute and than bashed for exactly the opposite reason the next. When one side calls you Hitler and the other side calls you Stalin, and each side complains bitterly how you ban everyone they agree with and moderate in the other's favor, the only sane response is to become curious about how the exact same thing can result in such an extreme variance in perception.
Sure HN isn't as bad as some places on the web, but tech still has its subcultures, blind spots and tribes - not to mention politics.
The biggest strain is mod burn out in many places, or even mods getting influenced by the content they police.
Do you guys have any plans or issues like that?
Two simpler factors are (1) I'm paid to do it and (2) I have creative freedom, which is important to me. Just remembering those two things reminds me that I'm choosing to do this. That sounds so trivial but psychologically it's a big thing.
Plus its HN, so the mission is matched by positive history within the community.
Part of the reason I ask is because the handling of the mental costs of such a job is not something covered in the content/research on moderation. We know that employees at firms get PTSD for example, but that's also from staring at the highest levels of radioactive content. Those people need therapy.
For something much milder (hopefully), what do mods do to make peace with things and not lose their minds?