I vouched it, because it's a worthy discussion to have, and it should stay up so people can see it.
The other two were knocked off the top 20+ pages within a few minutes, you'd only notice it if you got lucky.
@dang, can we have an intervention here? Maybe merge the two other dupes together and allow the discussion to be had? People clearly want to talk about it.
People saw it. People talked about it. And are still.
Direct to the discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39712618
If you didn't see it within the 20 minutes it was there, you would never find it unless you had that handy direct link of yours.
And this one is currently flagged. It was flagged when I vouched for it (that's how I was able to vouch for it)
But who would do something like that and have the resources to do that? (<-- that applies to TFA and the meta situation)
I found this info interesting in a Reddit aviation thread. It helps with the tinfoil hat feelings.
>He was not testifying against Boeing for anything to do with their planes. He already did that and has been public about it since 2019. This deposition was for the appeal for his own civil defamation case against Boeing, which he orginially lost. So Boeing was not threatened by his testimony in anyway. Even if they lost the case or settled, it would be a drop in the bucket compared to the harm he has already caused them and other legal issues they are already having...
Okay then it should be flagged by your reasoning, did you read the article? Because there's no proof in it that he ever said it. A woman who refused to identify herself past a first name claims he said it.
Comments can be upvoted, downvoted, or flagged. There, voting may be used to express agreement and disagreement, but flagging should only be used for comments that violate the site's guidelines.
The mans family said he had PTSD and Anxiety. The gun he killed himself with was his own gun. Considering those factors and occam's razor it feels disrespectful to have this sort of speculative conversation. If this were his wife, kids, mother I would be inclined to say news worthy, but random friend as the only person who heard this story feels a whole lot like someone looking for their own 15 minutes of fame.
Note: I did not flag it and have a comment on one of the other threads...
This is not evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. This is rank hearsay, and it doesn't belong here.
I do, I didn't, but I understand why it happens. my HN account is 14 years old, I read comments frequently, comment rarely, upvote occasionally, and flag very very rarely.
I don't downvote because can't, I don't have enough karma yet. so, even if people who can't yet downvote don't know the full effects of flagging it's _literally_ their only option to indicate their belief something doesn't belong on the front page.
there's an implicit analogue between comments and submissions. i suspect low karma users use the only tools at their disposal for both
You say "Maybe this one will stick this time" but the main posting about this received over 360 comments, which is a lot for HN. It's not like the whole thing has just been nuked with no chance for productive discussion. But I'm not seeing much productive discussion. I don't mind these being de-ranked for now.
If it turns out to be an eBay stalking scandal type story, then we'll have a lot to talk about.
If it turns out that even being a successful whistleblowing can lead to life experience so awful that you want to kill yourself halfway through the depositions, then maybe we can talk about what can we as a society can provide whistleblowers to help them navigate these incredibly difficult times (financially, emotionally, socially, and spiritually).
While you can find many much much older articles that are far more dead just a couple pages back.
You wouldn't get the news at all about this tidbit of information if you didn't check HN in the right few minutes.
I for one get a lot of my news from HN, as it's a news aggregator and a lot of other mediums are more censored.
People are clearly interested in talking about it and have opinions about it and find it newsworthy given the TIMING and possible MOTIVE.
YOU even had an OPINION you inserted in, but you don't feel others should be able to see this or put their POV or COUNTERPOINTS in?
I inserted nuanced opinion to help steer discussion away from emotional knee-jerk responses with no substance, to something a bit more productive. I haven't seen a lot of that in these threads, so I'm happy they're getting de-ranked. I don't think it's fair to characterize me the way you are.
0: https://abcnews4.com/news/local/if-anything-happens-its-not-...
> Please don't use uppercase for emphasis. If you want to emphasize a word or phrase, put *asterisks* around it and it will get italicized.
In other words, don't SHOUT EVERYTHING. Just like when speaking with people in person, shouting is generally a rude thing to do. If you want to emphasize something, just use asterisks around it: *emphasize* becomes emphasize (double up the *'s like ** or use \* if you want to include an asterisk literally).