←back to thread

“How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

(seymourhersh.substack.com)
688 points hunglee2 | 3 comments | 08 Feb 23 12:50 UTC | HN request time: 0.019s | source
Show context
dang ◴[08 Feb 23 18:31 UTC] No.34712496[source]▶
All: Whether he is right or not or one likes him or not, Hersh reporting on this counts as significant new information (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...), so I've turned off the flags on this submission.

If you're going to comment in this thread, please make sure you're up on the site guidlelines (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html) and note this one: "Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive." We don't want political or nationalistic flamewar here, and any substantive point can be made without it.

replies(21): >>34712914 #>>34712943 #>>34712970 #>>34713108 #>>34713117 #>>34713129 #>>34713157 #>>34713159 #>>34713244 #>>34713412 #>>34713419 #>>34713491 #>>34713823 #>>34713938 #>>34714182 #>>34714703 #>>34714882 #>>34715435 #>>34715469 #>>34716015 #>>34724637 #
davesque ◴[08 Feb 23 19:08 UTC] No.34713108[source]▶
I'm honestly really shocked by your stance on this. Regardless of whether or not this information is credible, this seems like text book flame war kindling. In the past, I've thought HN's policy of "you can discuss things like this in other forums" was wise and I've been corrected by it myself many times. Why wouldn't that apply in this case?
replies(2): >>34713177 #>>34713479 #
dang ◴[08 Feb 23 19:28 UTC] No.34713479[source]▶
Because it's interesting. Hersh reporting on it is an interesting story in its own right. Is what he says true? I have no idea. We don't have a truth meter here.
replies(3): >>34713678 #>>34713729 #>>34713816 #
threeseed ◴[08 Feb 23 19:48 UTC] No.34713816[source]▶
> Because it's interesting

No. It's interesting to you.

replies(3): >>34713898 #>>34713996 #>>34714310 #
h2odragon ◴[08 Feb 23 19:53 UTC] No.34713898[source]▶
Interests me too. You're always free not to read this article or thread.
replies(1): >>34714087 #
1. threeseed ◴[08 Feb 23 20:04 UTC] No.34714087[source]▶
Dang is manually influencing the ranking system.

So this is not necessarily what is interesting to everyone.

replies(2): >>34714424 #>>34714534 #
2. dang ◴[08 Feb 23 20:24 UTC] No.34714424[source]▶
Yes, moderators moderate this site. This has been true from the beginning, 15+ years ago.

Your comment suggests an assumption that without moderation, the ranking system would indicate "what is interesting to everyone". That assumption isn't just wrong, it's super wrong. Here are some past comments about that, if anyone cares: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so.... The short version is that without moderation, the site would be dominated by the same few hot stories repeated ad nauseum, plus an endless supply of riler-uppers. This is no way to optimize for what is interesting to everyone. As I said elsewhere in a reply to you, there are tradeoffs along every axis of this thing.

3. tanseydavid ◴[08 Feb 23 20:31 UTC] No.34714534[source]▶
Dang is doing his job.

The number of attempts to either shame or coerce him into doing things the way you think should be done, versus what he thinks is appropriate -- seems childish to me.