My #1 match was an account[1] banned for "posting unsubstantive comments and repeatedly breaking the guidelines". Now, I may be biased, but I don't think that's accurate :v
I did the search on my self trying to find similar souls share the passion about Godel theorem, viewing the current carbon-based civilization from the views of silicon-based civilization or the alien's, functional programming... But none of them are even close. This #1 match has some views I'm totally not familiar with but I have an opportunity (which I appreciated) to understand other views
In my opinion, this service doesn't have a good S/N ratio. Could give you irrelevant information.
I have to agree. Nothing stood out as being any way similar. It's hard to tell what their measure of similarity is here. This might be a case of let's just throw the data in, and see what comes out.
It caught users that use my style of dumping a ‘in line rhetorical saying’ in their posts. It’s not terrible, you’d have to laugh honestly at how predictable you are.
That is doubtful. We don't shadowban established accounts: we tell them why we're banning them and why: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que.... Shadowbanning on HN, at least for the last 7 years, has been reserved for spammers and serial trolls. It's possible that we made a mistake and neglected to tell you, but it's far more likely that we did tell you.
We don't ban people for criticizing PG, as anyone can easily see for themselves by using HN Search or looking at any recent thread from paulgraham.com.
If you're going to make a claim about why you think you were banned, you should provide a link so readers can make up their own minds. When it comes to "I was banned" stories, people say all kinds of things, most of which don't hold up against the actual record.
You banned me 2 days after the comment for saying that YC can be as or more exploitative than China's deals with African countries and I said that the parent defending YC but condemning China was acting on a base of racism and ethnocentrism. You can see how he brought a bunch of low-quality links I refuted them and you came 2 days later(I just realized that now) and banned me.
Oh well, I suppose you will be ban me again. BB cannot be criticized.
That doesn't link to a banned account. I assume you mean this one: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26659584. We told you we were banning you in that very thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26678745. Comments like "I must conclude you are a dumb person letting his latent racism to take over or you are aware you are acting on bad faith and you just dont care" are obviously against the rules here and have nothing to do with PG, YC, China, or any particular topic.
Moreover, we'd warned you and asked you may times to follow the site guidelines before that:
If you break the rules that often and ignore that many warnings, it's not surprising that you'd end up getting banned. This was not a shadowban and not because you criticized some particular person.
All this is a pity because you posted many interesting comments in the past and we would much rather have you as a contributing user. The sad truth, though, is that the harm you cause by breaking the site guidelines exceeds the good you contribute with the interesting comments—so I don't think we made the wrong call.
As Cardinal Richelieu apocryphally said"If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him."
I dont doubt you can present a similar set of "warnings" for any undesirable who refuse to toe the corporate line you are ordered and paid to maintain. All those rules are ambiguous, opaque, arbitrary and subjectively interpreted and enforced, but you know that.
The most ironic thing is that the measure you take with people who refuse to follow you faux-polite tone is censorship and virtual obliteration, something 1000 times worse. Most of the people I got personal (in argument) here were being racist/clasist/homophobic/ethnocentric but since they can shield themselves behind rhetorical what ifs and sing paeans to the geniuses of YC they have carte-blanche.
Give me a million times better the dysfunctional governments we all have before techno-fascists like you and your bosses, censoring anyone who does not suck up to them.
Not to contradict the Cardinal but your accounts have broken the site guidelines a lot more than the median commenter, and we really don't care about your views. Plenty of other commenters express similar views without getting banned. Actually we really, really, don't care. We're just trying to have an internet forum that doesn't suck.
It isn't about politeness, btw (let alone "faux" politeness) – you won't find that word, or that concept, in the site guidelines. It's about treating other people respectfully, and abstaining from garden-variety internet dreck. Let's not noble up the latter with self-flattering rhetoric.
1: https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=franciscrick1