7/8 flagged articles that made it onto the HN homepage today reference google's diversity memo see today from http://hckrnews.com/. Nearly the same deal from yesterday. Who's flagging these?
9
Google is replacing Uber, but not the way I predicted (blogs.harvard.edu)
15
I'm a woman in computer science. Let me ladysplain the Google memo to you (www.vox.com)
16
[Discussion] Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O (www.nytimes.com)
14
Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O (www.nytimes.com)
29
Sundar Pichai Should Resign as CEO (www.nytimes.com)
14
Google CEO cancels town hall due to leaks (money.cnn.com)
13
I’m Kevin and I'm the guy who bought 259684 BTC for under $3000 yesterday (bitcointalk.org)
11
Google cancels meeting about anti-diversity memo over safety concerns (mashable.com)
A lot of people here really don't want to discuss political thingns (no matter how topical they may be). Between that and feeling like it's just discussing the same thing over and over (even if the new article adds quite a bit more) you see the discussions start to vanish.
/newcomments and /active show that these articles are getting lots of discussion from some people. Some others are flagging them - probably because they are fed up with the issue. I believe it should be discussed and because there is new stuff (like the video interviews) but now even when I go over the comments, I'm not really hearing anything new being discussed.
That's certainly part of he problem as well. People tend to vulkanize pretty quickly so the discussion doesn't change much unless something REALLY big happens (obviously depending on their definition).
By being flagged more people don't see it so even thought there is discussion there isn't as much.
Just because you you are not intrested in discussing the topic in my mind does not justify flaging it. It is pretty obvious that many people are still intrested in discussing it.
Users often flag the ones that don't bring significant new information, because not only are they repetitive themselves but the discussions tend towards incivility in the information vacuum. It's harder to keep one's cool in the presence of such tedious repetition.
Sexism in our industry is a serious issue. What does it say about is if we can't or won't discuss it? What if it were about racism? Would we deny it's an issue?
Silencing only benefits the stronger side. Is that who we want to be as a community?
A lot of people here really don't want to discuss political thingns (no matter how topical they may be). Between that and feeling like it's just discussing the same thing over and over (even if the new article adds quite a bit more) you see the discussions start to vanish.
It happened a lot around Gamer Gate.
/newcomments and /active show that these articles are getting lots of discussion from some people. Some others are flagging them - probably because they are fed up with the issue. I believe it should be discussed and because there is new stuff (like the video interviews) but now even when I go over the comments, I'm not really hearing anything new being discussed.
That's certainly part of he problem as well. People tend to vulkanize pretty quickly so the discussion doesn't change much unless something REALLY big happens (obviously depending on their definition).
By being flagged more people don't see it so even thought there is discussion there isn't as much.
I don't know but personally I feel it's been overblown and discussed to death. And I don't need to see every single tech blogger's take on the matter.
See I disagree. But your viewpoint (which seems to be the majority here) is why I believe it has been flagged so much.
And I will say there have been some stories I've seen flagged on this topic that did not offer anything new and weren't worth discussing.
I understand it covering the site in the stories, but I'm not a fan of the near blackout we've come to.
Maybe there are other places on the internet that you can discuss it.
Banning the discussion under the rug will not help.
Discussion about sexism in tech businesses shouldn't happen on a board aimed at people starting/running/working in tech businesses?
Seems dead on topical to me.
Just because you you are not intrested in discussing the topic in my mind does not justify flaging it. It is pretty obvious that many people are still intrested in discussing it.
I agree, but it became quite obvious during Gamer Gate that's how people decided to handle the lack of a downvote button.
Oh, I thought that's what the hide button was for.
I litterally never noticed that.
If you hide it YOU don't see if. If you flag it NO ONE might see it.
The flagging stuff on these kind of topics always seems like censorship to me by those who feel attacked. (Irony not purposeful).
Nearly each day there are multiple articles that receive significant discussion: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=google%20points%3E100&sort=byD....
Users often flag the ones that don't bring significant new information, because not only are they repetitive themselves but the discussions tend towards incivility in the information vacuum. It's harder to keep one's cool in the presence of such tedious repetition.
Sexism in our industry is a serious issue. What does it say about is if we can't or won't discuss it? What if it were about racism? Would we deny it's an issue?
Silencing only benefits the stronger side. Is that who we want to be as a community?
Agreed. That was what frustrated me about the Gamer Gate discussion here. And Ellen Pao. And this. And probably some I'm forgetting.
It may be uncomfortable but it's important.