>No one associated with YC flagged this article
But there's no transparency, so there's no reason to assume it's true and not just the usual corporate PR.
But there's no transparency, so there's no reason to assume it's true and not just the usual corporate PR.
In my experience, the bulk of the community is willing to believe that we tell the truth about HN moderation, if only because it would be stupid and reckless not to. Literally the only value HN has to YC is the good will of the community. To jeopardize that for a little more moderation convenience, or whatever, would be a colossally dumb trade.
Believe it or not, our actual goal is never to do anything that isn't defensible to the community, such that if (heaven forbid) the entire HN dataset were ever published, there would be nothing inconsistent with what we've told the community over the years.
Why then, you or someone may ask, not just publish all the data? Two reasons: (1) we need to protect users; and (2) it would make it impossible to run the site.
Indeed.
> if only because it would be stupid and reckless not to
Not really, even if it was somehow proven.
> the only value HN has to YC is the good will of the community.
That's called a brand, and other brands do fine despite lying to their customers. In fact it's often considered a core part of business.
Posted in the interest of providing you the transparency you desire.