I've already seen a few times where content demeaning YC companies mysteriously got disappeared... and then summarily blamed on automated removal. Who's right? No clue. But being able to see that log as it happens would be a significant good faith action.
I mean HN could publish a ranking algorithm and claim that that is what they use. But then we still wouldn't know
(1) if that is really what's running in the background,
(2) if that is really receiving user inputs that lead to the observed outcome.
I'm guessing for most people here the programming assignment "create a fake log including these real inputs so that this story is suddenly dropped according to the ranking algorithm" isn't that hard.
I think that in the end, you end up trusting something. (Eg. Is the log fake or real?) IF that is so, you might as well design the system around a predetermined root of trust... here, the moderators.
The appeals process is to write to hn@ycombinator.com (Contact link in the footer.)
Go ahead and downvote me, doesn't make what I'm saying wrong.
If you don't like the moderation, apply to be a moderator.. or start your own forum.
The moderation is 100% transparent and you can see a log of every comment/submission that a moderator has removed. Furthermore, each subforum can control their own moderation team through a voting system. Moderators should serve their users, not rule over them as dictators.
In any case, this has zero effect on HN moderation. It had zero effect while YC China was being set up, zero effect while YC China was being wound down, and zero effect regardless of whatever "Chinese money" you're referring to, which you seem to know more about than I do. The only effect any of this has on HN moderation is people making up dark insinuations about it and posting them to HN. I expect that kind of thing from trolls but it's pretty weird to see you stoop to it.
I saw your comment earlier about this particular case - the flamewar detector went off. This would be a good thing to bubble up somewhere for transparency. I've mentioned many times that a public moderation log for HN would be a very good idea, and it would avoid scenarios like this entirely.
Again, I have a lot of respect for you as a moderator, but that is dependent on being able to push back when HN moderation fails. I've gone to bat for you before; it's only fair that I get to criticise you, too. Maybe this was a bit of a low blow, and I apologise for that, but it highlights places where HN moderation can be improved all the same. I don't think that pushing to have all of these discussions in private is going to be acceptable.