← Back to context

Comment by gr8tyeah

3 days ago

This is only meaningful if enough people read it and agree

That’s true. Fortunately, by virtue of it being added to the guidelines, quite a few folks here are prepared to reply to obviously generated comments by simply citing and linking the rule. Just search for “shallow dismissal” to see many examples.

It will take time, but eventually everyone will know about it.

  • > quite a few folks here are prepared to reply to obviously generated comments by simply citing and linking the rule

    Note that the guidelines do explicitly say not to post about guidelines violations in comments, and to email them instead. I know this isn’t a well-loved guideline in this modern era, but duly noted: those well-intended comments are themselves breaking the guidelines.

    • Are you referring to:

      > 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.

      If so, that seems different. If not, can you clarify?

      3 replies →

  • What constitutes “at edited”. If I throw a block of text in to an ai see if it makes sense — say a response to a post — and fold the suggestions in, is that “ai edited”?

  • Sadly, I suspect the rate of generation of AI "everyones" vastly exceeds the community's capacity to teach culture.

Nah they are pretty good a banning users that don't follow the guidelines.

  • Yes, and it’s not like they just insta-ban every infraction.

    I’ve broken the guidelines on this site before. The mods reply and say “hey, stop doing that, here is the guideline”. I stopped doing it. Life continues.

    • (They do react differently if you show a pattern of disregard rather than a one-time event; ‘dang before’ might pull up some of those in a search.)

That's assuming community input / democracy, but especially online there's a good argument to be made for authoritarianism.