over 200 comments
(Arguably a dupe, as it's been less than a year)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19212822
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20292361
Macroexpanded list:
A List of Hacker News's Undocumented Features and Behaviors (2018-20) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26866482 - April 2021 (255 comments)
A List of Hacker News's Undocumented Features and Behaviors (2018) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23439437 - June 2020 (266 comments)
A List of Hacker News's Undocumented Features and Behaviors - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20292361 - June 2019 (25 comments)
A List of Hacker News's Undocumented Features and Behaviors - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19212822 - Feb 2019 (183 comments)
I believe this is actually calculated using the date of the submission they have posted / commented on, instead of the current date. I've seen posts from 2010 where some people's comments have green usernames.
There are other behaviors I've observed but haven't confirmed. For example, highly controversial comments seem to sometimes be manually set to a point value of 1, even when they have dozens of replies making the real vote tally very unlikely to center on 1.
It's a problem that you get the "posting too fast" error only after you have typed a comment. Maybe a long and well thought-out one that took a lot of time and effort.
I've had cases where I've saved the comment in a .txt and gone back to post it later, but of course the discussion will have moved on.
I think the site should not even let you start typing if you are going to get the "posting too fast" error.
https://github.com/minimaxir/hacker-news-undocumented/issues...
As well as a discussion about "You're posting too fast."
https://github.com/minimaxir/hacker-news-undocumented/issues...
Is this an undocumented feature? Do the mods just turn the OP's first comment into text manually?
I personally use #3882cc. Played around with lots of different colours and that's the one I ended up on. After finding [0] not too long ago, I tried some other colours and ended up going back to this one. They just looked alien to me since I've had this one for what feels like forever.
Ouch. Any readers have favorite HN-like forums where this doesn't happen?
If there's a place on the internet where people can discuss all topics without it turning into a flamewar, or a series of people just saying things near each other without actually discussing anything, I would like to go there instead of HN. But those places are increasingly rare on the open web!
It’s that they are against the insincere and awkwardly forced pushes for diversity and inclusion by companies. Forcing behaviors and pushing insincerity leads to noncompliance and resentment.
The best type of diversity is, and always will be, organic.
I also feel like this limitation gives my comments a lot more weight, so it challenges me to really make a quality comment if I can help it.
Maybe it should be a default for everyone, although some keyboard warriors would probably get tilted.
Actually we often take rate limits off accounts without being asked. It's a matter of looking through the history and seeing if the account has stopped taking threads further into flamewar and/or is no longer making a habit of unsubstantive comments.
This is a good thing.
Jokes aside, the answer to that question is highly circumstantial. If you live in a very culturally/racially/ethnically homogeneous area, there probably won’t be much of a push for diversity because the place isn’t diverse by nature.
Lack of diversity is not the problem that western society, namely the US, would have you believe.
What a crock. I don't mean to play identity politics but I can't imagine someone who isn't a white man saying this. I've never seen a tech team with a reasonable gender split, and I can assure you no one is living in a genderally homogenous area.
Lack of diversity is a humungous problem in western society, and while I agree the place to address that may not be a company trying to execute merit-based hiring, it's clear if an entire system outputs only one category of person as successful, that system has deep biases and would be ripe for improvement by including other categories of person.
I do think it can be improved by making it more of a probation system that explains what's happening and how long the probation period is, presumably with some sort of exponential backoff so that over time probation converges to a permanent penalty. This is on the list to implement.
If it's downvotes over a time period I don't see how that's a reliable method to determine whether someone should be on "probation".
If it's manual then I dispute the decision behind it as I'm constantly limited and I'm very cordial while albeit contrarian.
I'm not saying there should be no moderation, just that whatever is triggering the shadow muting is flawed.
If you want post limits, enable them for everyone.
We do it because it's one of the few tools we have to try to prevent this place from destroying itself. Most of the other tools (such as replying to comments) take enormous much time and energy. It's necessary to have at least a few measures that can be done in software.
I wish that everyone complaining about this could realize the irony of the complaint: one of the reasons why the thing valuable enough to be worth complaining about exists in the first place is measures like rate limiting. But I know that's too much to ask.
I think 4chan has done moderation better than anyone to date.
This statement may or may not be totally factually accurate.
Heh, look! I didn't break any of the eggshells!
> If you want post limits, enable them for everyone.
That would be inconsistent with optimizing for curiosity [1]. There are heaps of users from whom the more comments HN is lucky to receive, the better.
[1] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...
This rate limiting seems to happen to me quite a bit, and when I've E-mailed, it's "Hmm, you look like you're posting fine now. We'll remove the limit." Leaving me scratching my head, searching in vain through my comment history for anything that might have plausibly triggered the action.
It's hard though because everyone who asks a question wants a detailed answer and detailed answers take a lot of time and energy, adding up to way more time and energy than we have available, or could ever have. We do our best, but it's a hard constraint problem.
I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be taking away from that.
One thing I intend to do eventually is compile those past explanations into a set of commentaries that could be linked to in the future. For now, the genres through which I explain this stuff are (a) HN comments and (b) emails, and I can't link to emails, so you get past HN comments.