There is one person/bot here with well over 30 comments in this comment section making all about race and racism even though the topic is migration. Don't you have any guidelines about that?
I don't assume you are omniscience, but I do expect you have at least minimal tools/stats where you can see things getting of charts. You did have to find the comment to which you replied and reminded the author of not starting religious wars somehow too.
It amounts to the same thing. You expect us to see everything you see which deserves moderator attention. But since "you" here means every user (since obviously you're not just asking for yourself personally), that means you expect us to see everything that anybody sees, which is exactly what I mean by moderator omniscience. It's far beyond our ability.
When this comes up, it's nearly always because someone (yourself in this case) saw X getting moderated and Y not getting moderated, and derived signal from that, when in fact it is nearly always noise.
By deriving signal, I mean jumping to conclusions such as "the mods are treating X side harder than Y side", or even "the mods must secretly be aligned with Y, otherwise I would not have seen Y going unmoderated". This is all non sequitur. Overwhelmingly, what you're seeing is randomness - but it's randomness which is even easier to overinterpret than ordinary randomness is (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clustering_illusion), because of the strong emotions generated by the underlying topics.
There is one person/bot here with well over 30 comments in this comment section making all about race and racism even though the topic is migration. Don't you have any guidelines about that?
Of course we do: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
Don't make the mistake of assuming moderator omniscience (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...)! - we don't see most of what gets posted to HN, and we mostly don't read the threads sequentially.
I don't assume you are omniscience, but I do expect you have at least minimal tools/stats where you can see things getting of charts. You did have to find the comment to which you replied and reminded the author of not starting religious wars somehow too.
It amounts to the same thing. You expect us to see everything you see which deserves moderator attention. But since "you" here means every user (since obviously you're not just asking for yourself personally), that means you expect us to see everything that anybody sees, which is exactly what I mean by moderator omniscience. It's far beyond our ability.
When this comes up, it's nearly always because someone (yourself in this case) saw X getting moderated and Y not getting moderated, and derived signal from that, when in fact it is nearly always noise.
By deriving signal, I mean jumping to conclusions such as "the mods are treating X side harder than Y side", or even "the mods must secretly be aligned with Y, otherwise I would not have seen Y going unmoderated". This is all non sequitur. Overwhelmingly, what you're seeing is randomness - but it's randomness which is even easier to overinterpret than ordinary randomness is (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clustering_illusion), because of the strong emotions generated by the underlying topics.
There's a well-established process for letting the mods know about posts that might need moderator attention - see https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu....