Hastorius's blog

The Hypocrisy of Censoring Opinions on Contests
By Hastorius, history, 2 hours ago, In English

So about half an hour ago I made a post arguing for the previous contest to be rated, at least for those with positive deltas. Whether you agree or not, it's not a particularly extreme opinion, yet my blog post was removed from codeforces within minutes. This is rather hypocritical action from a platform that very strongly supports durov on the basis of free speech, yet at even just a suggestion from a random pupil they go straight to deleting posts. Without getting too political, I think we can all agree that there is worse stuff on Telegram than disagreeing with making a contest unrated. I doubt this post will even be up for a couple of minutes, but regardless, codeforces admin should have significantly better ways of resolving issues than silencing those that even slightly disagree on relatively meaningless issues.

Edit: This was relegated to draft status randomly about 10 minutes ago. I reposted shortly after and the upvotes/comments are unchanged but it was most definitely removed from top prior to me reposting it.

Edit 2: The number of upvotes on this post was rising at first. However, in the past 20 minutes or so, I've seen a rapid decrease in this number, which is unexpected given the rapid rate of decline and the lack of any changes I've made that would alter public perception of this post to the extent that it would halve it's upvote count this quickly.

  • Vote: I like it
  • +27
  • Vote: I do not like it

»
2 hours ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +4 Vote: I do not like it

Agreed

→ Reply
»
2 hours ago, # |
← Rev. 3   Vote: I like it +9 Vote: I do not like it

Deleting the post really made no sense. If they delete this too, they're just proving your point.

→ Reply
»
2 hours ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +1 Vote: I do not like it

I agree

→ Reply
»
2 hours ago, # |
  Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

Agreed

→ Reply
»
2 hours ago, # |
  Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

Agreed

→ Reply
»
2 hours ago, # |
  Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

I think that is the right decision to be unrated. There is no positive delta without negative for others either so how give positive delta only?

Is it normal for a simple binary search div4 c to have 10.5 k solutions? People quit the contest so the point of competition was missed and rankings wouldn't be accurate.

→ Reply
  • »
    »
    2 hours ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it +20 Vote: I do not like it

    While you do have a point, that isn't the purpose of this post. I'm more concerned with how my previous post was blocked by admins within minutes of it being published. Leaving it up to argue over would have been a more reasonable action, instead of just removing the potential for actual dialogue about peoples thoughts on it.

    → Reply
  • »
    »
    2 hours ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

    C can be done even in O(1)

    → Reply
    • »
      »
      »
      113 minutes ago, # ^ |
        Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

      Yeah I hadn't even considered binary search on answer lol. For other people who did it with binary search, the strat is just to divide by k and round up both x and y, and you pick the greater of the 2 times it takes to get to that x or y coord, so the answer is practically just max(ceil(x/k) * 2 — 1, ceil(y/k) * 2).

      → Reply
»
2 hours ago, # |
  Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

Agreed

→ Reply
  • »
    »
    117 minutes ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it +2 Vote: I do not like it

    Don't make alts to agree with this, that just makes people think I'm artificially driving up interaction. Responding on your main shows people that actual codeforces members care about this issue.

    → Reply
»
118 minutes ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +5 Vote: I do not like it

whilst I don't agree with you that the round should be rated, I agree with you that we should absolutely not censor opinions, and that we should let people have discussions

→ Reply
»
115 minutes ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +2 Vote: I do not like it

Agreed

→ Reply
»
114 minutes ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +3 Vote: I do not like it

agreed

→ Reply
»
90 minutes ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +3 Vote: I do not like it

Auto comment: topic has been updated by Hastorius (previous revision, new revision, compare).

→ Reply
»
89 minutes ago, # |
  Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

Agreed

→ Reply
»
83 minutes ago, # |
  Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

Auto comment: topic has been updated by Hastorius (previous revision, new revision, compare).

→ Reply
»
81 minute(s) ago, # |
← Rev. 2   Vote: I like it +3 Vote: I do not like it

Agreed. Making it unrated when m1, m2, m3 were working perfectly fine seems unfair.

→ Reply
»
52 minutes ago, # |
  Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

Auto comment: topic has been updated by Hastorius (previous revision, new revision, compare).

→ Reply