Quora Bans Me for Saying the Earth Isn’t Flat | Hacker News Reader

Quora Bans Me for Saying the Earth Isn’t Flat

medium.com

38 pointsErichVaughnn83 comments

He didn't get banned for saying the earth was not flat, he was banned for calling people morons and idiots.

I'm as much opposed to flat earthers as any person here, but calling people with questionable beliefs idiots and morons only serves to make you feel better about yourself.

You can explain the ridiculousness of flat earth conspiracy without resorting to insults and you won't get banned as easily.

> He didn't get banned for saying the earth was flat, he was banned for calling people morons and idiots.

No he didn't?

> Long story short, I called a few people idiots and a few others morons. I got a warning about that, acknowledged it, and stopped referring to the people who believe the earth is flat as idiots and morons.

> After my warning, I was an excellent Quora user. I was courteous, even to people who completely disregard science, and I watched my language. Don’t get me wrong — I still interacted with flat earthers and I still told them they were wrong. I just sought not to violate the Quora Policies and Guidelines as I did it.

> But it seems as if my answers angered the flat earthers, no matter how courteous I was.

Sounds like the banning came long after he ceased insulting people.

The thing he was banned for was linking to an article he wrote which claimed "... Team Flat Earth will be shown to be the moronic fools they indeed are".

I mean, I agree that Team Flat Earth are moronic fools, but if you've agreed to be polite that isn't it.

If possible, I find it always worthwhile sitting down with people who hold odd views and try to understand them. Maybe not even directly (why the earth is flat) but the underlying reason (anti-science? ignorance? desire to be part of a special out-group?). Plain stupidity may not be the real story. Edit: sheer stupidity is not out of the question of course.

Why do you think it is worthwhile?

For your general culture/curiosity?

Understanding other people. First, it's plain interesting to discover if they hold the view with some merit instead of stupidity[0]. Second, I guess it's polite to listen when you can, and my manners could do with some improving. Third and perhaps most compelling, the better you understand them the better you might be able to counter their arguments. Fourthly, in the rare event they actually can make a solid case case for their side, you may learn something important.

[0] Yesterday (FYI I'm in the UK) there was a discussion in a shop by staff with a woman who didn't want to wear a face mask (they are compulsory starting today, yesterday they were not). She said they didn't help to protect you from covid so she didn't see why she should. I told her that was true but they weren't intended to protect you from viruses, they were to prevent infected people from spreading it to others. It was clear from her reaction she hadn't known this. Therefore she made up her mind without doing the least research. That's stupidity.

> Understanding other people

I used to do that too - with religion. Then I stopped because I believe that there are fundamental differences between rational and irrational people. The volume is on the side of the irrational ones, so I gave up.

I am better off avoiding these subjects now, as nobody ever convinced anybody.

> Therefore she made up her mind without doing the least research. That's stupidity

I am French and our news (following official governmental information) told us that masks are useless, then dangerous, then somehow useful, then life-saving.

Someone who is not that interested in the subject may have heard one of these opinions.

I am in the same boat when it comes to climate change and Brexit. There are zillions of opinions, but none of the ones I heard are clear cut.

I have a PhD in physics so I love numbers and equations. I am also painfully rational and yet I hear that the climate is warming globally, but this doe snot mean that this is visible on the small scale of my city, and then that in average the temperature of seas is raising, but the sea during my vacation is still cold. And why it matters that +2° here or there makes a difference.

Same for Brexit: this is an economic disaster, or a godsend - depending on whom you listen to. But nobody gives actual numbers. When I look at the EU budget, I see that the UK is a net payer. So UK leaving is bad for us, good for them. Except that it si not, because something.

I am not an expert in climate and in economy. And I do not want to be. I am open to having a well bundled rational set of information (and consequences) - it is just that I do not see them. For things like Brexit or climate change, they should be stuffed into my eyes daily.

When people start to wave hands instead of giving a few accurate and unbiased numbers, I conclude that they simply do not know, or are not sure.

BTW, the best, understandable argument about climate change was given to me by, who else, xkcd: https://xkcd.com/1732/, https://xkcd.com/1379/ and a few others.

> I used to do that too - with religion. Then I stopped because I believe that there are fundamental differences between rational and irrational people.

I'm an atheist so I sort of know what you're saying but I don't like to call religious people irrational. They have a certain POV and I know of religious people who are rational (most of them really).

> I am French and our news

ditto stupidity from out govt in the UK. But I do expect people to do a bit more research before making life-threatening decisions.

I've argued with brexiteers. It's a waste of time. "We're British!" seems reason enough for them (am a brit).

> I'm an atheist so I sort of know what you're saying but I don't like to call religious people irrational. They have a certain POV and I know of religious people who are rational (most of them really).

I am profoundly atheist, after being raised in a mildly religious atmosphere (religion the French way - not too strong, rather kind minded).

I think that people who are believers fall into one of the categories of "I have been doing it my whole life, I do not want to think about that", "I do not want to think about that because I am afraid of God's wrath, death, ..." and similar irrational ones.

I (seriously) understand these people - to some point having a strong belief is helpful and they may have an easier and more happy life. Probably less fear about the future and comforting state of mind about the "whys" of our existence.

What I cannot stand are scientists who believe in a god. I see that as a mental health issue where you are scientist form Mon to Sat, and suddenly forget everything on Sunday where you kneel in front of an imaginary friend (pick your favorite day of prayers). And find this normal.

To these people I become Pastafarian and a pain in the ass because I tell them how much these meat balls are important in my life of scientist, and how much it guides me on the path of illumination. People who claim being scientists and at the same time believe in nonsense are dangerous.

I'm not disagreeing but I do hold the very different view that religion and science are compatible (I used to be very anti-religion many years ago BTW). I'm OK with "god created all", Fiat Lux differs little for me than the big bang. You can have both.

What is intolerable to me those who use god as a crutch to excuse themselves from their own moral obligations to do the right thing and to think for themselves. I guess this is where we agree. I hope so anyway.

I can tell you from years of experience that people make up all kinds of stories about why they were banned. Often the stories are very convincing to third parties. That's not surprising, because they're designed to be.

The thing to check is whether there are links to the original posts, which would allow readers to make up their own minds. If the "$site banned me for $outrageous-can-you-believe-it-reason" story is linkless, odds are that salient details have been omitted.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

That's a plausible explanation, but so is "enough people reported me that I got autobanned".

For an equivalent, there are some subreddits that auto remove/lock threads if they get reported enough.

In particular, he admits he was originally insulting, but then was "polite".

Turns out his definition of politeness (from his own blog post he linked to) is saying "... Team Flat Earth will be shown to be the moronic fools they indeed are".

I personally agree Team Flat Earth are moronic fools, but I haven't promised to be polite to them.

Politeness doesn't mean you aren't insulting them. 'Moronic fools' is a fairly polite insult.

In this case he was already warned for calling people morons, then he called people moronic fools. Surprised pikachu face?

I find it far more insulting, despite being perfectly polite, for people to insist the Earth is flat, than for someone to dismiss them with what is, essentially, an accurate descriptor. I am utterly insulted at the waste of intellectual space and the energy expended in these useless debates when people who lived two thousand years ago had pretty much settled it.

I believe flat earthers are intentionally weaponizing their ignorance as an act of rebellion. So yes in that case it is meant to be insulting, just nit anything to take personal.

Moronic fools deserve some respect!

We're in strange times if you can't call a flat-earther an idiot and a moron. What's next, I can't call a Nazi a piece of shit?

There are objectively correct times to use insults, this is definitely one of them.

I disagree I think personal abuse is always wrong.

You can deal with even the most extreme situations and even the worst people while still being respectful.

You can, but you ain't gotta. Not everyone deserves our respect, especially not those calling for ethnic cleansing.

Honest question: do you believe everyone deserves respect no matter what they do?

I am all for keeping things civil as much as possible and keeping conversations polite. But to me respect is earned, not a given.

A basic standard of respect, yes. You can think someone isn't good at their job, or that they're mistaken, or that they make bad choices. But there's never any reason to resort to using personal abuse.

So if you are in a building held hostage by a terrorist they deserve your basic respect? You’d never use violence or abuse against them? Or a mugger? Or a Nazi camp guard? Or a gay conversion therapist? Or a rapist who violated you? Or someone who falsely accused you of rape? Or someone who murdered someone you love?

Meh. When a person identifies with a stupid idea (i.e. "I'm a flat earther"), then the person is stupid along with the idea, and it's okay to say so (IMHO). It's good for evolution to give such "corrections".

I think it’s possible to approach all situations respectfully but that the difficulty bound to do so varies depending on the parties and position being discussed. At some point and some edge cases it’s extremely unfair to expect polite responses. (Eg. Blaming a Black person for responding “fuck off” to a white person who says “lynching was good actually it keeps blacks in their place” is distinctly unfair to the black person as they are then expected to take and accept dehumanization and abusive language without responding as if they’ve been dehumanized or abused).

Insulting someone is not abuse or at least shouldn't be. It's only abuse if you have power over someone and your insults cause them to experience social repercussions.

> We're in strange times if you can't call a flat-earther an idiot and a moron. What's next, I can't call a Nazi a piece of shit?

The context here is someone being banned from a platform for violating their requirement that posters be polite on their platform. This isn't a "sign of the times," nor does it conflate to some greater societal or cultural shift, or have any implications on mores, values or free speech. No one is saying you can't call flat earthers idiots or Nazis pieces of shit in general.

If Quora requires you to be polite when giving answers to questions, they're well within their rights to boot you if you aren't, regardless of how justified it might be.

A platform isn’t some magical place with no basis in society, they don’t exist in some walled-off world where the real world is alien. They are still part of the general culture.

It’s a fault of Quora to have dogmatic rules like this, there are justifications for impoliteness.

It's not a fault of theirs, it's a business decision. They want to project an image of authoritativeness and professionalism, and rules of polite candor accomplish that.

It's no different than Hacker News requiring civility or Stack Overflow requiring on-topic, non general discussion. Not every platform does, or should, have the purpose of allowing free flowing discussion.

I disagree

Being too sensitive with morons is what's causing the most trouble in this pandemic.

Because apparently some snowflakes can't put on a mask without fainting and help stop the spread of the disease. Because they can't do anything to help and act mostly in ways that are completely self-centered.

So no, let's start calling things for what they are and act accordingly.

People know the Earth is not flat since 2000BC, period.

I don't think that calling mask skeptics morons or any other forms of ungentleness are likely to help. I can't think of any instances where large minorities have been convinced of their wrongs by mean talk from the majority.

What would actually help is a commencement of sensible policy at the top. Another thing that would help is an enforcement scheme with teeth. It is incorrect to pass laws about important topics then decline to enforce them rigorously. But I think insults are not on the list of helpful things.

Shame has been used to police human behavior throughout history. See: all religions.

I do not dispute this. I think shame works in small communities, but not over the internet.

It is usually shame with the implicit threat of ostracism with the implicit threat of burning the witch at the stake.

When were you ever convinced you were wrong because you were called an idiot by someone who disagreed with you? It simply breeds resentment.

It's not about convincing them of anything, it's about cutting the relationship

Have you ever tried convincing a flat-earther with arguments? Do you have time to waste in doing that? Do you think they really believe that or they just take pleasure in being insufferable?

And yes, if I'm doing something and people start complaining about it with harsh words I might reconsider it.

Well, I am very rarely called a moron but whem it happens and it comes from someone who knows what they are talking about it's the fastest way to get the point across and get me to reevaluate.

It only breeds resentment among people who have their ego married to their beliefs. That might be most people but among those with a bit of intellectual honesty and curiosity being calling someone a moron or an idiot about something is the the best way to convey "you should really think about it more instead of making a full out of yourself" sentiment. I always appreciate someone doing it to me and being right. It saves a lot of time and pointless arguing. You just have to be right. Preferably don't be a jerk about it in the future as well.

They are idiots. Why tip toe around and try to spare someone’s feelings who express statements that are provably false and should be known by someone who has enough of an education to read?

It’s not like a difference of opinion between supply side and demand side economics.

Nobody will listen to you if you call people morons, no matter how dumb they act. If you want to convince people not to believe these conspiracy theories, you need to come across as intelligent.

You can call their theories moronic and idiotic (with some proper scientific backup), but when you call people that, you only reduce your credibility.

And how well does it work when we're nice to them? How many people can be reasoned away from an unreasonable belief?

> And how well does it work when we're nice to them?

Very. But people who call them idiots don't want to convince them, they want to ridicule them to signal their own superiority to other people who also know the earth isn't flat. It's like teenagers bullying younger kids to show off. They don't want to teach those younger kids how to do $whatever, they just want to laugh because they're so great in comparison.

If you approach them with empathy instead of insults, you'll usually find them to have specific reasons for their beliefs (a general and deep seated mistrust for "the system" is what I've encountered the most), but aren't actually attached to them that much. It's more of a "fuck you" to everybody who is part of the system that they feel mistreated by, like a rebellious teenager. What might also happen if you approach them with empathy of course, is that people like the person that wrote this article, will make fun of you and call you an idiot for engaging with idiots instead of calling them idiots like you should in his mind.

They are “flat earthers”. They won’t listen to anyone either way.

True but taking the high road has resulted in science denying idiots to come to power in the US. I am not sure taking the high road is beneficial start calling them out on there idiocy stop giving them space for spreading their idiocy.

> They are idiots.

No they are not. They are cleverly triggering people who have chips on their shoulders into behaving like assholes. That's how they thrive. If it wasn't a flat earth it would be something else. It is a special kind of psychology related to trolling (but don't tell them that).

Quora, like any social media, has an inverse scale problem. It works better before “everyone” is a user. With a few thousand intellectuals, it was a fine site. Flooded with the crazy and willfully ignorant, it loses value.

This sole sentence could be a HN post on its own.

The author states they were banned for linking to their article [1] challenging Flat Earther's to take the "flat Earth route" from Johannes Burg to Sydney and beat the commercial great-circle flight. But what exactly would the "flat Earth" route be? Do they have a consistent claim about what the layout of the Earth is? It should depend on the Flat Earth model someone is using. (Though I suspect they'd all agree that the flight should be shorter than the great-circle path.)

[1] https://medium.com/@brothke/a-simple-experiment-that-can-pro...

That's a nice mathematical questions. My guess is that there are a few models that make minimal sense, and this experiment can refute them. (Ignoring wind currents, that are important and probably make the return flight a few hours longer/shorter.)

In an unrestricted case, you can always select a map where that any real geodesic is a line in your flat map. I guess to prove that the surface is not flat, you need to measure the more distances, like measuring the four sides of a quadrilateral and then the two diagonal. (I think it is not possible using geodesics, without measuring one distance or an angle or a surface.)

The nice part of Gaussian curvature is that you can measure it in the surface, without a model of the 3D word that is "around" it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaussian_curvature

Normally I'd say there is more to the story, but this seems consistent with my experiences on Quora. I've never been banned from there, but the stupid comments and answers are so prevalent there, that I can only assume that the platform has gone far out of their way to cater to that crowd as a safe space provider.

> What was the trespass that got me banned? I said that the earth is not flat.

If you keep reading you find it looks more likely he was banned for being abusive.

> I called a few people idiots and a few others morons

So, good riddance.

Would you say the same if jack went on a banning spree against those that carelessly roll out the buzzwords racist, fascist & islamophobe?

When these are used without justification and against entire groups I consider it a much worse offence than being firm vs those who should know better.

I had this happen on Twitter recently. I was trying to have level-headed conversations about wearing a mask with different people, and after about a week, my account got knocked out.

This guy needs to find a new hobby. Flat Earthers have zero cultural clout.

His Quora activity does nothing to change anyone's mind or make the world better, and certainly doesn't make him seem clever or good. The Medium post is a victimhood rant from someone who can't accept that sometimes people will say "enough" to you being a nuisance.

He seems like a mean, entitled person with nothing useful to do with his time and intellect.

>combined with the fact that there’s money to be made on the topic — especially on YouTube, where flat earth channels tend to have a lot of subscribers. As YouTube (like Quora) monetizes content, the more viewers, the more money flat earthers make.

Is it really that much of a widespread belief ? I really have trouble understanding the current phenomenon with some anti science conspiracies.

> Is it really that much of a widespread belief ?

I am fairly sure that like a lot of the current fever around conspiracy theories, the vast majority of people are doing it simply to wind people up - and it seems to be super effective. It's a new counter-culture.

I can’t fathom how people actually use Quora when answers are often (thinly-veiled) advertisements.

Questions too! I kinda love the ones that are like "Is compassion the key to an expanded conscience?" with the top answer being "Yes, as I explain in my book Compassion: The Key to an Expanded Conscience".

Quora is pretty much trash anyway. A lot of setup by stooges for business consultants to answer things.

You _will_ find useful info there and it is much easier to see it as the first response compared to a few years ago but I don't engage with any content beyond what I can see without logging in. Generally the quality of answers is pretty low unless it is in a popular subject or a "big name" answers.

None of the moderation systems are perfect. There are entire mod cabals in every community and that is sometimes worse than automated moderation.

Aviation questions often have great answers.

I used to answer a lot of veterinary questions. But these days when I click onto a link to Quora, that’s the end of the line, because you have to log in to see anything else. StackExchange is just a better site now.

> because you have to log in to see anything else

No, you can still read the answers to a question when you e.g. have a link to it from Google. But when you go to the frontpage there is indeed a login prompt.

They might be referring to clicking other links on the page which prompts you to login when you navigate away from the question page you landed on.

But these days when I click onto a link to Quora, that’s the end of the line, because you have to log in to see anything else.

Just like Medium...

> You _will_ find useful info there

Debatable, I think. It's been literally years since I found any useful information on Quora. It's mostly spam now, even worse than Answers.com was back in the day, with the added bonus of a sign-in wall.

Note: if any person will find only one useful answer there, what the parent said will be true.

Of course this is pedantic and while I don't like Quota at all, I don't think it is up to us to judge what people may find useful (this depends very much on things like circumstances, age, mental capacity etc). What you might find trivial or even silly, might be an eye opener to someone else.

Quota is certainly not the best environment to get good qualified answers, but that doesn't mean you won't find one once in a while.

Reminder that you can append “ ?share=1” to the url to see all of the responses without logging in

Or enable the filter list uBlock Annoyances in Ubo

Whether or not the earth is flat, and a host of other discussions, mostly exist to satisfy people's need for conflict and attention. Ask yourself how many times you have seen someone change their view in these confrontations. Then ask yourself how many times you have seen people admit that they are trolling for the sport of it, or for the attention.

It isn't worth the effort to take part in such discussions. It only legitimizes trolls.

Adding my experience on Quora. In general quality of the questions and answers are pretty bad. In my feed most of the popular answers start with some provocative/eye-grabbing pictures (exotic animals, landscapes, outrageously good looking people).

Sometimes I feel like I'm reading ads about spammy media sites, who use the same tactics.

"[Moron] was once applied to people with an IQ of 51–70, being superior in one degree to "imbecile" (IQ of 26–50) and superior in two degrees to "idiot" (IQ of 0–25)."

Ironically, years ago, moron would be the correct technical term to refer to a flat-earther.

Please show respect to the 'moronic fools', they have a right to have their opinion that the earth is flat and that they're not 'moronic fools'.

Tolerance must have its bounds, or the intransigent minority will eventually trample over the reasonable majority.

Applied to this situation – I will only show respect to people who earn the respect by being willing to engage on equal terms: admitting the possibility that one's opinion could be wrong, following scientific best practice, to actually change one's mind when swayed by evidence.

> they have a right to have their opinion that the earth is flat

"Is the Earth flat?" is not the kind of question you can really have an opinion on. It has a definite correct answer ("no") which has been established by numerous independent methods by numerous people acting independently repeatedly over thousands of years.

For that answer to be wrong and the truth of Earth's flatness to have been kept suppressed for so long would require a vast conspiracy operating over centuries or millennia involving almost all political leaders, educators, and scientists, and a near total control on information flow.

That level of conspiracy could almost certainly only be carried out in some kind of Matrix-like simulation, but if we are in one of those then the question of whether or not the Earth is flat is superseded by the question of whether the Earth even exists.

What word(s) would you suggest to describe such people? The OED defines "stupid" as "Having or showing a great lack of intelligence or common sense", which applies here so "stupid" seems accurate. It defines "moron" as "a stupid person", so "moron" seems applicable.

It defines "fool" as "A person who acts unwisely or imprudently; a silly person". "unwise" is "not wise or sensible; foolish".

Putting that all together, "moronic fools" may be impolite, but it is accurate.

"Man invents fictional scenario and gets angry about it".

You got banned for been rude and uncouth, which clearly against their TOS.

quora was nice when it launched and for some time. now it's really bad. you have to sort between straight ad's and ads in desguise, and this is 90% of the experience, if not more lol.

having filtered the following results on google (google search filter), I'm finding the content to be bearable again:

experts-exchange.com

medium.com

steemit.com

quora.com

Too rude for Quora? There will always be a place for you here. Welcome home.

It’s been years, so I know I’ll get the details wrong, but I vaguely remember a dating website that had an entry survey to help match people to whoever had the best compatibility score. But, for whatever reason, they got far more women applicants than men, and started turning particular women away. And some other dating site tried to advertise to those women (not good enough for ___? Try us instead!).

What dating website managed to get more women than men? Isn’t that like the unachievable holy grail of dating websites?

What percentage of the women were real?

I want to say it was eHarmony, but I’m really not sure.

Looking at https://www.datingsitesreviews.com/article.php?story=Why-did... , it may not have been a question of too many women, but just a question of no willingness to accept people from outside the target market.

In that case, you will get a reply by dang like

fake dang> Please don't call other users moronic fools here. We ban accounts for doing that.

And after a few warnings, your account will get banned.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com