{"id":49465665,"user":"ChrisArchitect","time":1787841652,"time_ago":"2 days ago","type":"comment","content":"

[dupe] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49451343","comments":[{"id":49465680,"user":"forestrywat","time":1787841703,"time_ago":"2 days ago","type":"comment","content":"

More related than dupe, as this article includes a statement from the group being labeled terrorist.","comments":[{"id":49466126,"user":"ChrisArchitect","time":1787843366,"time_ago":"2 days ago","type":"comment","content":"

Same discussion. Statement shared over there. No need to split up the discussion.","comments":[{"id":49466432,"user":"layer8","time":1787844564,"time_ago":"2 days ago","type":"comment","content":"

I submit that “dupe” is a misleading misnomer if the submission does not link to the same content.","comments":[{"id":49468639,"user":"1vuio0pswjnm7","time":1787853215,"time_ago":"2 days ago","type":"comment","content":"

"I submit that "dupe" is a misleading misnomer if the submission does not link to the same content"

Imagine every time you make a submission the same commenter submits a reply with only a different thread URL, no title, no story URL, and the misnomer "[dupe]"

But the story URLs are different, not duplicates

It makes no sense

This site has constant repetition of URLs, topics and comments

It has 250+ pages of active stories at any one time. That's potentially 250+ different discussions

There is nothing in the design to prevent "duplication", nothing in the guidelines, and nothing in the proactive moderation

HN is described as a news aggregator. It should be expected in a news aggregator, users may submit stories by different authors published at different URLs offering different coverage of the same news topics. If the site operator wanted to prevent this for some reason, it could. HN does not

It seems the algorithm actually promotes such stories. Hence this sub-thread

Discussion on HN is generally highly repetitive, unoriginal and filed with meme-like, and sometimes toxic, comments. Many folks complain about it, others might like\nit. Every user is different. It's not for any one user to determine what any other user should or should not see; readers can make up their own minds

The majority of HN users do not participate in "discussion". They either read the stories and/or the replies. Some might only visit HN periodically. Perhaps they are not following HN discussions, they have no idea what has been discussed earlier and no time to find out or reason to care. The majority of HN stories have zero replies, i.e., no "discussion". It stands to reason that some users read the stories, i.e., the news, irrespective of "discussion". Upvotes on these stories are potential evidence; unless these users are just upvoting titles

Alleged "duplication" of discussion is irrelevant in these submissions because there is no discussion. Stories are not just "discussion topics". They are news, for readers who are interested in reading news

Finally, (real) duplicate URLs are commonly found in submissions that never get labeled "[dupe]". These are explicitly allowed on a discretionary basis. The "[dupe]" tag is inconsistently applied and cannot be relied on","comments":[{"id":49469045,"user":"ChrisArchitect","time":1787854798,"time_ago":"2 days ago","type":"comment","content":"

Yeah, every time, because you know what you're doing.

Nothing to do with the urls, but the duplicate discussion topics. The site in fact does not have constant repetition of URLs, topics and comments (within similar timeframe). 250+ active discussions. All unique.

Stuff moves pretty fast around here and you can miss it. It's more about keeping things fresh and not repeating discussions over and over. And additionally stopping some of us from having to see the same story over and over.

Nothing in the design because that's what mods are for. Mods, and submitters looking out for the well-being of the site!

Your repeated submissions amounted to spamming the same topic while most coverage brings nothing new to the discussion that warrants a separate thread. Why split up the conversation only to have it all duplicated and impact the 'freshness' of the site with discussions already had hours to days earlier?

If you've been around enough it's weird that you're not clearer on this. Striving to keep the feed fresh and discussion together helps us all, you could do better to contribute that way.","comments":[],"comments_count":0,"level":4,"url":"item?id=49469045"}],"comments_count":1,"level":3,"url":"item?id=49468639"}],"comments_count":2,"level":2,"url":"item?id=49466432"}],"comments_count":3,"level":1,"url":"item?id=49466126"}],"comments_count":4,"level":0,"url":"item?id=49465680"}],"comments_count":5,"url":"item?id=49465665"}

Comment by ChrisArchitect