Stratfor emails reveal nationwide surveillance system operated by the government | Hacker News Reader

Stratfor emails reveal nationwide surveillance system operated by the government

rt.com

1 pointJohnsonB8 comments

Open articleView on HN

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4358020 <- A few comments

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4369172 <- More comments

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4367967

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4369287

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4369993

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4369205

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4370011

That's disturbingly pedantic and self-righteous.

Of course it's nothing to do with seeing the same thing posting over and over again, and it's nothing to do with seeing discussions split over multiple submissions, and hence the same points being made over and over again. It's nothing to do with trying to make HN better, and trying to cross-reference things to help people keep discussions in one place, and seeing other submissions from other sources that may make the point in different ways. It's nothing to do with trying to help people find information.

Course not.

I assumed there would a justification along those lines. But it certainly helps no one to beat a dead horse like that in a submission with zero upvotes. If reposts really bother you that much then message PG to write up or commission an auto-repost suggester.

But it certainly helps no one to beat a dead horse like that in a submission with zero upvotes.

It helps you by pointing you to a discussion of something you find interesting. But instead of thanking him, you try to make him stop.

I find his comments useful. I would be very upset if he stopped because of your comments.

So is it better to wait for a post to get a few upvotes, get to the front page, start to accumulate a discussion, and then point out that it's already been submitted and discussed?

You should consider that a.) two or more discussion for a major topic is actually appropriate and that b.) You can't, nor should you, control the flow or location of commenting on a particular subject. That will be determined by the community as a whole. As for reposting duplicate links, again, that is an issue that will be solved only with better software.

(b) I can't, nor do I try to control the flow or location of commenting on anything, let alone a particular subject.

(a) If it's appropriate that two or more discussions for a major topic take place, that will be determined by the community as a whole.

I don't force the discussions to happen in only one place, I just point out that other discussions exist. I don't control anything here.

  > As for reposting duplicate links, again,
  > that is an issue that will be solved only
  > with better software.

Which won't happen, and in turn is why I point out when it happens so that people are better informed.

Your response is starting to intrigue me. Is it simply that you are disappointed to find that your first ever submission was not unique, and had already been discussed elsewhere?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com