If it were true, it would make no sense to try to censor it, so I'm going to bet on it being a joke?

I really have no idea who would care specifically about censoring it on HN, anyway.

I always thought everything he said was on orders from the highest, either to troll Western media, or else to make the regular military nervous so they wouldn't start a coup.

It’s definitely not a joke.

https://apnews.com/article/ukraine-war-russia-nuclear-647a54...

CNN is much maligned, but at least they mentioned Rostov is a long way from Moscow.

If CNN and others are covering it, I think it reinforces my point, that censoring HN is irrelevant.

> censoring HN is irrelevant

How is censorship irrelevant? Yes there are other news sources but it’s not a good look for HN.

It's not a news source!

And increasingly nearly everything that is mainstream news or clickbait shows up on HN anyway, despite the Guidelines page saying it's off topic.

If CNN, Reuters, the AP, the NY Times, are covering something, it will show up 5 minutes later if a given item disappears.

Just to follow up on that last sentence, I read this, today, confirming I wasn't the only one thinking it:

"So accustomed are we to viewing Putin as a master tactician, that the opening salvos of Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin’s disobedience were at times assessed as a feint – a bid by Putin to keep his generals on edge with a loyal henchman as their outspoken critic."

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/24/europe/russia-putin-wagner-pr...

The reason is that there is a lot of noise and articles posted are all regurgitating the same bits of "he said" with barely any hard information.

Everyone has the same facts: there are some green men with guns and there are some green men with guns that just arrived. Some people are quick to call some of them Wagner.

There is indirect evidence pointing to takeover of Rostov to piece together, but it exists mostly in the shape of fragmentary telegram posts. There seems to be a lot of that evidence, enough that it seems plausible, but even people on the ground next to those green men have no idea.

Would you please stop posting these unsubstantive flamewar comments? You've been doing altogether too much of this. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

> This site is a fucking joke.

This site is not about politics. I do not flag/downvote such topics but I do not want to see them among science/programming news anyway.

This isn’t politics, it’s a rapidly unfolding military situation in a state with nuclear weapons.

It's about whatever the HN echochamber wants it to be.

Some fat orange fuck gets indicted? Top of the pile! [1]

Actual geopolitical development that impacts several continents and lots of HN readers directly? FLAGGED TO DEATH.

> @dang All: please don't post low-substance and/or high-indignation and/or political battle comments to this thread, or any HN thread. We're trying for something else here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

LOL

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35379099

Political science is a science

shrug

Users are flagging them. We can only guess why users flag things, but in this case I don't think it's so hard to guess: this is a sensational, politicized story, it's too early to tell how significant it is, and there isn't a lot of intellectually curious conversation to be had here. We sometimes turn off flags, but in this case I'm inclined to side with the users.

"If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic" - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html (I don't watch TV news, but I'd be very surprised if this one wasn't all over it)

p.s. Sometimes it's really good for HN to be the place that you don't come to for coverage of something sensational. We just had a ton of threads about the submersible that imploded; not to mention the shit-ton of threads about the reddit that imploded. I don't think it's good for HN to do every implosion.

> it's too early to tell how significant it is,

no it isn't. this is definitely significant.

even if putin crushes prigozhin and consolidates his power, that is still significant. there is no way this isn't significant.

unless you believe that it is literally all made up, but russian media is reporting on it. that seems idiotically unlikely.

It isn't made up, but the story isn't even a day old. HN isn't a site for tracking sensational stories hour by hour. We want more reflection than that: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor....

There are certain stories where it's better for HN to not be about that. This feels like one of them to me; I'm happy to be wrong if the story turns out otherwise, but the current reports are far too politicized to evaluate objectively.

I do agree that HN is not the site where sensational stories by the hour should be posted to. However, this is potentially a significant and historic event that is happening before our eyes.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jun/24/vladimir-putin...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2023/jun/23/russia-uk...

Except those rules weren't applied to the titan sub.

I see your point (and said something similar in a different comment) but at the same time, the two stories differ in ways that touch the core of what HN is about—so this isn't just an arbitrary call.

For example, that story was less likely to degrade into flamewar; this one is highly likely to. That story, although morbid, had more entry points for intellectually interesting conversation than this one. That story was closer to HN's sweet spot topic-wise; this one is far from it. That story was likely to be accurately reported because it wasn't high-stakes politically; precisely the opposite for this one. That story was less likely to get dominated by predictable talking points and pre-existing opinions [1]; this story is likely to get little else. And so on.

There's a higher-level consideration too: it isn't a good idea for HN to be too consistent. That would be predictable, predictability is uninteresting, and we're trying to optimize for the opposite [2]. The best strategy is the other way around: try to be unpredictable from any sequence [3]. So any time you see $foo-story-1, $foo-story-2, for any value of $foo, it's best to steer away from $foo-story-3. I know this is frustrating for people who prefer formal, predictable rules, but it's good for curiosity to frustrate that particular preference (within tolerable limits).

It's also frustrating for people who have legit reasons to care deeply about $foo-story-3, and that's a different phenomenon—I empathize with that feeling and it's not something we're doing on purpose. Such topics exist for every reader, so everyone ends up getting frustrated in this way. Hopefully it evens out in the long run.

[1] (we did get predictable raging against corner-cutting billionaires, but that was about it)

[2] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...

[3] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

Interesting. So, discussion on the outbreak of war was allowed as an exception, but the coup that maybe ends the war is verboten? I'd love to read the mod chat from that discussion ;) assuming you aren't acting unilaterally?

Oh, it's sensational, is it? Well, yes, I suppose a coup that ends a bloody war (that is contributing, if only ideologically, to the crippling economic policies all over The West) would be rather sensational, wouldn't it?

Edit: Related question, why can I vouch for some flagged comments, but not for others? Edit: Think I figured that out. Vouch is only for dead, not just flagged?

There hasn't been a coup and the war hasn't ended. You guys are way ahead of yourselves. If something of historical significance happens, there will be plenty of time to discuss it.

The team here is small so a lot of the decisions are indeed unilateral. We don't all keep the same hours.

> Vouch is only for dead

Correct!

We trust and appreciate your judgement, of course.

That said - at this stage, the events definitely do appear to be quite significant.

Per the British MoD: "This represents the most significant challenge to the Russian state in recent times."

Yes, we appreciate the mod team's efforts throughout. Nevertheless, this event is turning into something historic, even if it ends up in failure for the instigators.

Implosions of unusual size then?

(I don't believe they exist.)

(Replying to dang as the flagged parent is dead.)

Moreover: if you think a post was unfairly flagged, you can email mods ([email protected]) and request that flags be suspsended.

Mods can make the call to reinstate a post or let it stand, and I suspect in this case the flags might remain. But occasional political posts (US presidential elections come to mind) and other large news events occasionally clear the hurdle.

(I email with vouches occasionally myself, with mixed results.)

Is this part of general tech strategy to suppres news about Ukraine per Elon example?

At this point it is clear thing is happening ... and users flagging it are flagging it for very political reasons.

No. Nobody tells me anything about general strategies, tech or otherwise, so if/wherever such things exist, they're a no-op on HN.

I did not meant it in terms of coordination or someone giving orders to someone else.

It sounded like you were saying exactly that! - so it's not clear to me what you did mean.