Ask HN: Why is the abuse of flagging allowed? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Why is the abuse of flagging allowed?

5 pointsO__________O28 comments

@Dang: Please explain why HN tolerates/allows flagging without having an explanation per flag that’s traceable to guidelines system has logged the related user as having been notified of prior?

As is, to me, I understand balance of HN, having too many rules, injecting rules/systems that upset the feel of HN, but I feel like users abusing flags is toxic to the spirit of HN and if any user is found to be abusing flags they should be ban from being allowed to use flags and disputing flags should be possible; if a user repeatedly falsely disputes flags, they should be ban.

View on HN

  >I feel like users abusing flags is toxic to the spirit of HN...

But it's always going to happen. Same with the upvotes/downvotes. People will flag a post or downvote a comment they don't like, whether or not it happens to be true, relevant or accurate.

The secret is not to let it bother you. At the end of the day your karma ratings here are just "internet points" and flagging or downvoting are just people proclaiming that "Someone is wrong on the internet!". It really is no different to Twitter or Reddit, in that regard. We just like to delude ourselves we're a cut above those kind of sites.

Down voting of submissions is not possible — unless a user flags a submission, which is NOT what flags are for, they’re for flagging the violation HN guidelines.

Some submissions are in foreign languages, which is a violation of HN guidelines. And some are spam, which also is. So, yes, flagging submissions is appropriate.

You may say that it's used more broadly than that on submissions, but flagging submissions is not inherently wrong.

Obviously there are numerous valid reasons to flag submissions, many of which Dang automatically does — issue is the invalid reasons.

My two cents worth.

The problem is this, is the person who only has low karma any less skilled in spotting a topic that isn't exactly fit for posting or discussing further, than one who has a lot more karma? Do those who have over 500 karma points, any better at remaining objective when they consider down voting a post?

Introduce reasons and I expect the outcome won't be much different to forums where some people over use a report feature and just select what passes ... generally the acting mods soon realise there's a pattern but it takes time to deal with the BS - actually it's a real time cost.

Presently as far as I see, the system at the moment discourages a user walking into hot topics where the ideologues aren't going to see reason anyhow, so there's little point to pile into the conversation. However if something inappropriate is submitted, a wider field of people can flag it. Sure some people might abuse it, but I would guess there's a list of flagged and dead submissions that staff can look over and review.

Actually for the last week I've been following flagged and dead posts - nothing firm but many are nearly the same or on about the same subject that was posted a couple days before ... if not a few hours before, many are simply advertising their own site, and goodness knows why idiots keep posting here about gummy bears. Today was the first I vouched for a dead post, since it was the shiny flag why not vetting who advertises on a website is very bad ... or hard core porn ads will kill a safe for work or kids will be using it website / service.

>> Do those who have over 500 karma points, any better at remaining objective when they consider down voting a post?

Understand your point, but ease of which abusing the system is to simple. I could easily automate creating 100s of accounts a week with a rep of 31, which is all that’s required to flag — and anyone that understands how flagging could even do this manually, if motivated. Gaining 500 rep though per account would take 16x the related rep.

Realistically only measure of skill at flagging is skill at flagging; aka there should be a reputation system for flagging alone and any abuse of it should result in a ban for access to flagging or reviewing flags.

>> but it takes time to deal with the BS - actually it's a real time cost.

100% agree, but then don’t claim HN is community base on the spirit of curiosity, open reasoning, etc. Further, I don’t believe for a second that if Dang requested help creating open source moderation tools that were able to be integrated into YC’s legacy code that community would not help or be reasonably, if forced to do so publicly.

>> Actually for the last week I've been following flagged and dead posts

Not aware of any way to see 100% of these without writing code to interface with API, am I missing something?

It's in your profile settings. Only found it myself 10 days ago or so. I thought from the very start I was seeing dead submissions and comments but I must have been mistaken.

Understand, specifically “show dead” — but that’s not a list of ONLY flagged comments or ONLY flagged submissions — nor is it from those lists easy to get context of why they’re flagged or easy to vouch to unflagged them; to unflagged item, click its related timestamp, then click “vouch” on the items sub-navigation.

Oh, in regard to a list of dead or flagged only, that's what I would guess HN staff have access to. I have to push back a great number of pages and do each individually. Some are not worth digging as the reason is pretty obvious. Might seem like complete boredom or madness, but I used to have a keen interest in forum dynamics, spent a bit of time in a flame war discussion forum for a few years, where members might post sightings of certain behaviours etc.

I too have interest in dynamics of communities. Also my position that it’s healthy to expect community members to understand the economics, behavioral aspects, etc of community. For example, while I don’t likely do it as much as I should, I do intentionally try to review Dang’s public comment logs from his profile to remember how much work he puts in, better understand his take, etc.

If you’re interested, numerous books of Amazon on topic, for example:

- https://www.amazon.com/Art-Community-Seven-Principles-Belong...

Honestly, reason I posted about this is because ever once in a while I get stuff flagged, but even trying to have open minded about it, I have no idea why it was flagged and in my experience Dang’s response is neither does he.

And this submission is FLAGGED — how specifically is it a violation on HN’s guidelines?

This is toxic - and claim that some how Dang is able to moderate the toxicity is telling — as is the claim the HN is a community based on spirit of curiosity and open reasoning.

* Please feel free to click the timestamp for the submission then click “vouch” if you feel this submission should NOT be flagged; if it’s unclear how to do so, happy to try to make how more clear.

It's not surprising this is flagged. If you read the recommendations, discussions of downvoting (and flagging certainly counts) are not welcome because they're circular, uninteresting, and don't contribute positively to the site content.

Why are only ranked users able to flag? My guess is that after someone invests enough time in HN to accumulate 500 karma, that person has some idea of the spirit of what's wanted here. Ads and job postings are certainly not, nor political flames, etc. So a "karma'd" user might spot that pretty quickly. I don't get out my flag flyswatter very often but when I do, it's because I'm trying to help keep the garden clean, so to speak.

>> It's not surprising this is flagged. If you read the recommendations, discussions of downvoting (and flagging certainly counts) are not welcome because they're circular, uninteresting, and don't contribute positively to the site content.

This applies to doing so as a response to within comment where the topic itself is NOT the abuse of flagging.

>> Why are only ranked users able to flag? My guess is that after someone invests enough time in HN to accumulate 500 karma

Only 31 rep is required to flag; this is mentioned numerous times already in the comments to this submission.

> user is found to be abusing flags they should be ban from being allowed to use flags

That's how it works.

Source?

dang has said so repeatedly, and I remember users talking about appealing to get their flagging permissions back.

Thank you for the clarification, sincerely appreciate you taking the time to share your understanding.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler's_veto

The only purpose of flagging is always a heckler’s veto. The problem is whether such deliberate censorship occurs to satisfy disagreement or community standards. At this time there is no way to know.

No, all the following an more is possible: public logs of flags, admin logging of rules viewed by users to do X action, requiring flags be tied to an existing rule, having flags audited users, banning flagging rights from users abusing them, banning users repeatedly falsely disputing flags, etc.

Users abusing flags though is clearly toxic to the spirit of HN and should not be tolerated — it has no place in the HN community.

Where is the distinction defined that determines abuse? It appears flags when used in a non abusive manner almost only apply to submissions and not comments. Punishing abusive comments appears to almost exclusively occur with maximum down votes while flagging comments appears to only occur on comments that have too many upvotes suggesting a silencing of a difference of opinion.

>> It appears flags when used in a non abusive manner almost only apply to submissions and not comments.

This is in accurate, though as is, agree that it’s hard to see as a result of HN not having a public log and reporting of flags.

>> Where is the distinction defined that determines abuse?

Any flag not clearly traceable to a violation of public guidelines.

Why should someone be forced to explain why they vote the way they do?

Flags are NOT votes — which is part of the problem, HN treats flags as votes and users are abusing it. Down voting is not even possible for submissions unless you flag a submission. Down votes on comments is not possible unless you have 500 rep, but only 31 Karma, they can flag submissions — which is a super downvote and frequently abused, and Dang for sure is aware of this.

Source for rep required to downvote or flag on HN:

- https://github.com/minimaxir/hacker-news-undocumented/blob/m...

If "Flags are NOT votes" ... but "HN treats flags as votes"

...then flags ARE votes, friend :)

Feel free to explain disconnect between downvotes requiring 500 rep - but flagging only requiring 31 rep.

You can dislike the fact flags are votes

But it doesn't change the fact that they are, mate :)

I believe its a self regulating system.

Agree, which is why I posted this, but to me at the point any pattern is toxic to the spirit of HN — Dang has a responsibility as the only official moderator to address it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com