Ask HN: Why did the TC wall of shame link get pulled?
Some sort of official reason for why this article got pulled would be nice.
Original thread here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=709111
It seems a bit hypocritical that HN can link to TCs articles exposing Twitters internal documents while it cannot link to something exposing public relationships of TC.
The original link : http://soundkeeper.com/
22 comments
[ 2.4 ms ] story [ 53.3 ms ] threadSubsequently rms retorted that only Free animals masturbate, while Linus weighed saying the ideals of masturbation didn't matter, just the pragmatism of cranking one off to avoid blue balls.
Edit: whoa there is a strange suicidal gene in this post's ancestry. I was replying comment on whether http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=708679 was relevant
I don't think it's fair to shame these people for conducting business and attempting to bring in customers. Are they suppose to pull their advertising every time TC posts a controversial article? They're ads would barely show up at all.
For people upset about the Twitter leak, convincing the advertisers to support their idea doesn't sound crazy. So, I disagree that the page is ridiculous.
I'm a big fan of not seeing stories if HN's users don't think they are interesting (go social web!), and I don't think the original link was interesting.
I kind of wish it hadn't been flagged too. I didn't catch it until this second posting. Now that I look back at the HN post, it looks like I'm rehashing some of that conversation.
I am distressed by the (seemingly new) policy where no comments are allowed on [dead] topics. Even if something's kill-worthy, interested people should be able to finish conversations. Also, as some topics go back and forth between [dead], there needs to be some way to discuss borderline cases. On the topic itself is better than followup stories (like this one).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_wall#Journalism
It's fascinating from the standpoint of ethics and journalism. Internet journalism to boot. It's fascinating from an IP law perspective, something people here tend to deal with a lot. It's fascinating from the computer security/social engineering perspective. And it's just a fascinating look into Twitter's deepest darkest secrets. It's possibly unethical (I don't think so, but that one's above my pay grade) but even if so it's still very interesting.
The wall of shame link is just a political rant reducing a complex First Amendment issue to a diatribe. It's mean-spirited (though perhaps warranted, depending on your viewpoint, but that's irrelevant here). It's not more interesting or relevant than if it were asking us to boycott Rush Limbaugh's advertisers. It's unlikely to be fruitful. And it's not in any way relevant to the tech topics usually discussed here.
If you hang around long enough, you're going to get articles flagged and marked dead. If enough people in the community flag an article, because they think it's off topic, it disappears.
I didn't flag it, but I think it was off topic, because it's advocacy and not necessarily hacker interest. It causes drama and doesn't really contribute to the conversation.
By the way, I think this post itself is off topic. From the HN Guidelines: Resist complaining about being downmodded. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. source: http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
It wasn't exposing anything at all. You can go to techcrunch.com and find the advertisers. It amazes me how fast all of you criticize TechCrunch as being a piece of shit, yet it is the top domain here which everyone constantly upvotes: http://top.searchyc.com/domains . Feel free to criticize what they did with the twitter docs, but people are justifying it with silly comments like "TC is Perezhilton" or "Fuck techcrunch". It's also a site that most startups here would love to get on. Lastly, as a whole I'm quite sure TechCrunch has made the startup world a better place, and we'd rather have it than not have it.
Hacker News isn't a place to bitch and whine about things, especially those with minimal merit. I enjoy coming here because there's tons of intelligent conversation and amazing information to consume. That article brings none of that to the table.
People with rss-scraping auto-submission scripts (free karma if you're first) heap fuel on the fire.
Oy. There are days when HN seems determined to jump the shark, and the only reason it doesn't is that the editors heave it back.