The IDF/Hasbara has been active on HN for over a decade. Trying to write things off as conspiracy theories doesn't work when the site is under persistent social influence attack by a state actor.
> Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data.
Not really sure how you have a productive conversation when one party says that not only will they consider that anyone who disagrees with them is acting on bad faith, but they intend to disregard all rules and circumvent any bans.
Anyway it's pretty obvious that talking about this topic is completely pointless so I'm going to quit for now because I'm not actually a sock puppet or a paid shill or whatever, I'm just a human being who has a differing opinion.
Edit: looks like I actually had the foresight to use a throwaway in 2014, so there's no doxxable info: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8406178
@dang please see this
From my point of view, there's no evidence for this. Doesn't mean it wasn't true, of course, but in the absence of evidence I would go with the simpler explanation, which we know for a fact happens all the time: there are a lot of people who feel strongly about the topic and share the opinions this account was stating (just as there are on the opposing side).
I also don't think your theory is consistent with all the other posts that account made about everything from Photoshop to Javascript floats to package managers to whether rms is autistic, OpenBSD, and so on. Of course one can argue that this just proves how clever the state propagandists are, and how good at covering their tracks, but this line of reasoning ends up getting pretty absurd.
The fact is that HN has, and has had for years, very many commenters articulating these same opinions, sometimes within the site guidleines and sometimes not, and just the same is true of commenters articulating opposing positions. I don't see any difference between the comments people single out as examples of putative astroturfing and the others. Moreover there's nothing in the private data we have that would change this picture significantly. On the contrary, all the evidence points in the other direction: real users with strong feelings and therefore strong opinions.
This kind of thing is exactly why we have that guideline that asks users not to post accusations of astroturfing, foreign agenting and so on, but rather to contact us privately. We're not saying these things don't exist—but the odds that you (I don't mean you personally, of course, but everyone in this situation) are reading-in something that isn't there are orders of magnitude higher.
We need something objective to go on (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...) or all this just reduces to the mist of imagination.
You've given me one link so far, and I gave you an in-depth reply. That's not "skirting around" and it's not telling you to "pretend" (as if such a thing would work). If you want me to engage with you seriously, you should omit such swipes. Writing in-depth responses to these questions is extremely time-consuming, and that means taking time away from the other 50,000 things we're overwhelmed with. I'm not going to keep doing this if you signal that you're unwilling to accept an answer you don't already agree with.
It is common on open internet forums (like HN) for people to become convinced that they're surrounded by enemies, and eventually that the mods are in cahoots with their enemies - because the alternative is to believe the simpler-but-more-painful theory that other legit users sincerely and strongly disagree with them. I've written about this many times (e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23308098).
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8406178
and
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8406257
arrived at the same "Please, no simplified propaganda on HN" phrasing when they're coming from separate accounts within a short period of time. You've written a lot of text, but so far you still haven't answered how these two pro-Israel accounts ended up posting the exact same phrasing if they're not sockpuppets. I'm not sure how I can make it any more clear.
(1) You didn't link to those two posts, only one of them (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48900528). Now you're complaining that I "still haven't answered" a question you didn't ask in the first place.
(2) Are you seriously asking me to tell you why 2 comments from 12 years ago happened to use the same turn of phrase? How should I know? Perhaps one saw the other say it and repeated it.
(3) The fact that you have to go back to 2014 to even pose your question is self-refuting. If this were a serious issue, you'd have no difficulty supplying recent examples.
Where?
> and you're turning a blind eye to it
I spent over an hour taking seriously, looking into, and responding to the concern you raised, only to be accused of "turning a blind eye". That is what one gets for being an internet idiot, which was obviously my mistake here.
> On other sites you will frequently see
That is what people resort to when they have no evidence to point to on HN itself, which is already clear from your having to go back as far as 2014 to dig anything up. HN gets millions of posts a year—from randomness alone you shouldn't have to go far back to come up with something that looks plausible, however superficially.
I gave you that thread because it sticks out in my memory as the oldest, most egregious example of Hasbara on HN, and those posts are a testament to how deeply embedded they are on this site and how much they have expanded their operations here since then. Apparently, your former self agrees too, otherwise you wouldn't have banned one of those Hasbara accounts. I can provide you with lots of newer, softer examples, but my point is that Hasbara has been here parroting the same identical state-approved talking points for over a decade.
I made a very simple point in the comments here - the headline and article make extraordinary, shocking claims that are not supported by the text of the legislation. For this I get accused of being a sock puppet or a paid foreign agent, despite the fact that I rarely comment on this topic, have a long comment history on a variety of topics, and didn't even say anything in support of Israel, I simply pointed out that the premise of the article is not just incorrect, but laughably so.
I would also like to point out that other comments in this thread include references to 1950s propaganda about Jews controlling the US government, references to how people who support this legislation are "Epstein-bought politicians" and other anti-semitic (not anti-Israel) trash. The far-right 1950s US politician quoted elsewhere in these comments was not anti-Israel - Israel barely existed at that time - he was just an old-fashioned Jew-baiter of a kind that was common in that era (he's mostly remembered for his McCarthyist campaigns against celebrities, but that's another story).
This article is just a new version of those ancient "a secret cabal of Jews control the world" conspiracy theories. The legislation is the equivalent of, say, an HN-funded company signing an MOU with a university to collaborate on R&D. Nobody would describe that as a "merger" between the company and the university. To go from "the DOD will appoint someone in it's vast bureaucracy to supervise research collaborations with Israel" to "the entire vast US and Israeli militaries will merge into one" is absurd and you only get there if you're primed to see the world through this conspiracy-tinted lens.
Do people unfairly conflate legitimate criticism of Israeli actions with anti-semitism? Sure, but then you look at a post like this and commenters are immediately jumping to how the US has been a "puppet state" of the Jews for "generations" (to quote another commenter), and then any pushback is immediately attacked as illegitimate, paid shilling.