Is there such a site today? If so, can I get the link? If not, it would be great if someone (with the time/motivation/skill) could build a new one and maintain it over the long term. Maybe even push the data to a blockchain or something.
Obviously this should be a feature of HN itself, it's pretty simple, but in lieu that it seems incredibly important for someone to build and maintain it.
Even though the recent complaints about YC/Stripe are not fully founded (IMHO) there is no doubt that YC's dominance over the tech community's conversations is something to be watched very closely. They do very obviously have their thumb on the scale.
There have been shenanigans in the past and there will be in the future. The conflict of interest is simply too strong.
The most obvious issue today is that HN doesn't prevent voting rings for sufficiently large organizations, like YC itself. Why doesn't it prevent them? Well, the answer is obvious: they have a massive incentive not to. Why isn't there a transparency log for moderation? Same answer.
Edit: from dang's post I saw one of the sites I had remembered: http://hnrankings.info/
How exactly would tracking negative reviews of links and comments be of benefit to anyone other than the person receiving such feedback?
It seems to me that if someone is receiving negative feedback through their submissions by being Flagged or Pushed Down or even Killed on a site like HN they should be able to infer some value from that and take it as it is. Analyzing it would serve no greater purpose than protecting an ego that may be shielded from the truth too much already.
Chances are my comment is going to result in exactly what was described but I am self aware enough to know that the result is not unwarranted. I just need to stop being baited into such conversations.
I am trying to turn a new leaf and be more positive so I will concede that it hurts when a community rejects my opinions and comments and I can appreciate where you are coming from. I just think if you are smart enough for such things to affect you enough to pose such a question then instead of looking for a way to fight it, be proud that you are considerate enough to feel that the opinion of others means something to you. You are human!!
They do have stuff in place to prevent that kind of stuff. See @dang's posts, especially re: that recent Bolt non-story.
Also, for stuff that's been removed, you can always enable the "showdead" option in your profile settings.
I am curious for examples.
I wouldn't argue against more transparency, but it's odd to argue that Ycombinator shouldn't allow people to vote for posts about companies they are associated with. They do pay for the site, after all. Who are you to declare this? By-and-large I think posts stay on the front page if and only if there is community interest in seeing such posts.
I'm more bothered that there are many things that the community wants to discuss that are immediately flagged off. I don't have a problem with 'dang' or Ycombinator consciously deciding that certain topics are unwelcome, but I'm worried about overuse of the "heckler's veto". A very small number of flags by individuals can prevent a discussion that many more people clearly want to have.
On the bright side, I've had this concern for many years now, and the site is still alive. While I'd prefer for the discussion be a little more open, staying alive this long means something about the system is working, it's hard to argue with success.