Ask HN: Why can't I delete my own posts?
Hello HN. Yesterday two posts of mine have been changed by HN moderators in such a way that I can't support neither of them anymore.
With one of them the source has been changed to an URL that only remotely has something to do with what I posted. Also the new URL is a wacky blog post with sparse information and almost no value while my original submission contained a huge report on the same topic. See: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=827719
The headline of the other submission has been changed in such a way that now it's basically a lie. It does not reflect the post anymore. See: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=827821
I don't want to be responsible for such low quality and low value or even misleading submissions. I can't delete them though. Why can't I?
46 comments
[ 4.2 ms ] story [ 239 ms ] threadAre you sure it was a moderator action and that your account was not compromised somehow ?
edit: it looks like you're right and people have been messing with your submissions.
That sucks.
Prediction: this post will be 'dead' soon.
edit2: I looked at the original submission, I think the 'tablet' moniker is a bit heavy, but if it allows you to log in to facebook it certainly is more than just a photo frame.
That's why I want to at least have the ability to delete posts that were formerly mine.
Outstanding idea.
Happens quite often actually. Fixing blog spam for example, but also to kill editorializing in the title. One argument is that the title and submission should represent all of us, whereas comments can be used to voice your opinion on the matter if you want to.
> Prediction: this post will be 'dead' soon.
I hope so. I've flagged it.
Personally I think that meta discussion should simply have a place out-of-band, instead of being suppressed.
Which of course you are supposed to ask for on the 'feature request' page where it will then be ignored...
HN is a great community but it does have its flaws (like any community), the weird thing is that there is this tendency to pretend that it is perfect by discouraging discussion of the flaws. I'm not sure I understand the background of this, but since the benefits seem to outweigh the costs I take it in stride.
But I do see opponents point that meta-discussion tends to get very repeating after a while and even self-serving. The latter is the reason I flagged this submission. It isn't so much the feature request, or the "when should submissions be changed" discussion, but the simple "boohoo somebody changed MY submission boohoo THEY SHOULDN'T!"
You can only edit/delete posts for one hour, to prevent various kinds of abuses.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=828216
The first instance the link died possibly because lots of people flagged it.
With that said I was a bit confused too. Your original link read like a blog - of which the first post was about that one form of traffic calming. I think it was an easy mistake to make thinking it was blog spam because that other link posted is apparently the original source of the photo's/story.
The fact you had additional content was less clear and probably was missed by some (especially after the blogspam comment was added). According to the guidelines: Please submit the original source. If a blog post reports on something they found on another site, submit the latter.
If people thought it was not original source they might flag it.
The second one is a bit more complicated. It was a somewhat over the top title (and I know it comes straight from the source link). Personally I would have supported editing it - though I do agree the title chosen was somewhat dull and misleading too!
With all that said there has been a marked increase in active moderation I noticed since being back from holiday this week. Notably the Eddie Izzard topic was killed off despite being top of the front page for a while (probably rightly killed off but I havent seen that happen much before).
New mod? or stricter policies?
At the end of the day I dont think it will reflect on you much :) I've found people dont care too much about a feww seeming "indescretions" (valid or not)
In case you change my submission to the worse due to false flagging don't make me responsible for that.
You know. Fair enough that is an idea for a feature (personally I think the community style moderation seems to work ok); but demanding it isnt likely to get you anywhere. Just a comment.
I'm glad I got to it before it was killed. It was, frankly, one of the more interesting posts that I happened to see yesterday. It's remarkable that he could do that, and considering how difficult it is he accomplished quite a mind hack.
and discussion http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=827803
That is one amazing story, I'm seriously impressed. Izzard always was one of a kind, with this he literally transcends himself. Whoever bumped that off HN does not have my gratitude, if there is anything at all that separates successful entrepreneurs from the failed ones it is stamina and the will to continue in light of hardship.
Deleting that is pretty much proof positive that HN moderation really is not doing a very good job.
http://h71036.www7.hp.com/hho/us/en/pclc/articles/series-dre...
I want to be able to at least delete this submission which is allegedly mine.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/gadgetreviews/?p=7554
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/09/hp-dreamscreen/
The products have evolved while the name hasn't. It's the same as referring to an iPod as an MP3 player.
Does anyone actually do that? I don't think they do TBH.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/electronics/1264866011/...
Do you refer to the iPhone as a 'mobile' or 'cellphone'? I'd say most don't, because it's not really a mobile or cellphone. People refer to it as an iPhone first and foremost, because then people realize it's actually pretty much a mini macbook.
In the shops here though, iPods are usually in a dedicated Apple display cabinet :/
Personally, I think "photo frame" should be used when all it does is show photos. If it can do things that allow the user to interface with it, tablet is probably more appropriate.
At the end of the day though most things now are just general purpose computers, with firmware that limits what you can use them for.
You forgot the "some" at the beginning of the sentence ;-)
I doubt the non hacker crowd recognizes anything of the kind!they probably think of the IPhone as the "cool mobile phone" ( a deserved reputation imo)
Edit: What I'm trying to say is that I don't know if requesting it on the feature page really helps, but I haven't seen any features requested outside the feature page actually seen implemented. pg is probably very busy and few people send patches.
If you point people to the feature request page then you should be able to back that up with the knowledge that you are not effectively sending them to a black hole.
I think that should read 'stops bothering me'. Everybody here speaks for themselves, so do you. By using 'we' you assume that he was bothering me, and everybody else here too, and in fact he wasn't, though there may be many more people that sympathize with you.
I agree with your suggestion that editors should leave a unique mark to make sure that people realize that the original content is no longer what it was when the poster put it there. Accountability flows both ways.
As long as editing is limited to clarifying titles and fixing links I'm ok with it, but if there ever would be a single documented case of a comment being edited to make it read something that wasn't there before then I'm quite sure that terms-of-service notwithstanding HN would become a different site overnight.
I'm not in the habit of checking up whether what I wrote before is still there, maybe I should be ?
hn is a fun and uplifting place to come on break. The moment anything about it turns negative for you, log off, go code something, and come back tomorrow. We start over every day.
I see HN as a completely different place than you do. I see it as a place to meet people that are interested in the same sort of thing that I'm interested in (at least I hope so), which means that if I were to be misrepresented somehow by some anonymous editor that it would make a huge difference to me.
I've had things I posted on HN come back to bite me in the ass, not in large ways but in ways that indicate people are willing to read through a person's posts to find more about them. That's why I no longer list any personal details in my profile. It's a shame, because I don't get the lengthy email discussions that used to follow threads, but I don't want any ties between this and anything else I've done.
I've felt before like deleting this account and its posts along with it; I regret that there's no option for me to do so.
The original source with smaller pics provides more relevant information. I think I flagged correctly.
And I don't recall the HP digital photo thing story, but a quick scan of the comments reveals a lot of complaints that it's not a PC, just fancy digital frame. I'm guessing your title reflected HP's marketing speak and the mods changed it to a more technologically accurate description, which just happens to not be at all what HP's marking language is. I full agree with the mods here as well.
It's too bad your views of what's accurate seem diametrically opposed to what the HN community thinks is an accurate description of reality. I guess different people just have different perceptions, much like taste, you probably can't argue about that.