To respond to your comment, I think sometimes that the skills of debate are fading from society. Often it is not the subject matter of what is being disputed, but the manner in which it is presented, or the person/ideology espousing it.
Edit: you've been doing this repeatedly. That's not cool. Please don't do it again.
If the vouch system shouldn't be used to rescue otherwise worthy on-topic comments, what is it there for, and why not ban the user entirely?
Before you 86 me over it, consider if you're in the right here, and what types of chilling effects your statement above has. Nobody claims that this place is the paragon of fairness, but this community works hard to keep it fair and balanced without this type of clandestine moderation. What you just attempted is morally wrong. If that gets me banned for daring to disagree, then you're doing me a favor by adding me to the list.
Even someone who's ideologically motivated like the guy I replied to can be right at times, whether I agree with them personally the rest of the time or not, so I'd implore you to reconsider the readiness with which you bear down on those who are doing the moderation for you by surfacing the comments where the shunned, for once, aren't pursuing their own agendas. Isn't that the purpose of the vouch system?
Deflated.
Of course the vouch system should be used to rescue worthy on-topic comments. That's its purpose. I wasn't talking about that, but rather about your repeatedly posting like this:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29528161
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29528049
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29528043
There are two problems with doing that: (1) it's repetitive, which is not what HN discussion is for; and (2) it's basically doing an end run around moderation.
Pretty surprising and sad that you would ban me for a comment like that. Reading it back three years later I’m not wildly proud about it but I don’t think it’s ban worthy.
But I want to push back against the idea that this is not a shadow ban. I see now that you replied to my comment to let me know. But there’s no notification mechanism on HN for comment replies! So I didn’t see it until just now.
A ban mechanism that eventuates in the banned user logging on and participating for 3 years before realizing no one can see their comments is a shadow ban! If you wanted it to be clear there should be some messaging besides a comment reply. Just my two cents
> Pretty surprising and sad that you would ban me for a comment like that. Reading it back three years later I’m not wildly proud about it but I don’t think it’s ban worthy.
It's clear from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16118062 that I didn't ban you for just one comment. It says: "We've banned this account for repeatedly violating the HN guidelines with uncivil personal attacks and by using the site primarily for ideological battle. Those things are not allowed here, regardless of your politics, how right you are, or how right you feel you are." That's obviously about an overall pattern of behavior, no?
> A ban mechanism that eventuates in the banned user logging on and participating for 3 years before realizing no one can see their comments is a shadow ban! If you wanted it to be clear there should be some messaging besides a comment reply.
Definitional arguments aside, yes—you're making a fair point. It's on our list to fix this, perhaps with a probation system that tells people they're banned for a time period (at least at first) and then unbans them. Most people respond well to feedback, so it's possible this will help in other ways too. However, don't underestimate how much damage is caused by accounts that wilfully abuse the site and take advantage of such systems—it's hard to design something that's both fair to the majority and not so vulnerable to abuse.