Dan's offline now. I'm the other moderator here. We can't allow commenting like this to continue without taking any action. It has nothing to do with the targets of your attacks, and everything to do with keeping HN healthy. HN is not the venue for campaigns against specific individuals or organizations. The people you're referring to are not on HN, and haven't been for a long time. The people here are Dan and I and ordinary HN users. These ongoing outbursts have no effect on the companies and people you're talking about, and serve only to make HN worse for the people who are here. You're welcome to take whatever action you’re legally able to against the people and companies you've mentioned. But we can't have you continually venting this stuff in unrelated HN threads.
Be precise about the harm done to the community, which I've been part of for longer than it's newer members have been alive. A community in which my accurate forecasting of "risk of ruin" type outcomes has error bars between 60-90%.
Be precise about what a healthy HN means, because that's not written down anywhere, the guidelines such as they are? A masterclass in selective enforcement of blank-check norms for money.
You've got the same dataset I do, and exactly the same access to legitimate authority as opposed to self-arrogated police powers on behalf of public benefit corporations which have neither benefited the public nor a shareholder.
I was here long before you or Dan, and if you ban me, it will be the wedge I need to move this conversation somewhere else.
Let's dance.
edit:
and one more thing, quote a primary source once in a while.
i have better citations ranting than you do larping adult:
If you read this and mount a credible objection that can't be addressed by tweaks to methodology, then I will leave the site forever.
But the asymmetry of the power of selective participation is tyrannical: you engage when you like, your silence is a moral victory by default, and I'm the senior community member by a lot.
Engage constructively, substantial ly, and in public, or deal with my press releases.
The data shows black holes in comments and submissions that correlate with Altman. I ran it on myself to not fix anyone. There are other search parameters that are worse, it's open source, proven in lean4 to a growing degree, and you win by making an argument, not being an unclected apparatchik.
Ok, this is not good for anyone, so I've banned the account until we have some reason to believe that things have stabilized.
I know it may be hard to believe right now, but we appreciate you and your contributions. We can't have users going on tilt on Hacker News though. As I said, experience has taught us that it's not good for anyone.
