429408/pg1](http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread429408/pg1)

------
quanticle
Can anyone tell me why this is wrong, exactly? Or, for that matter, why this
news?

Edit: to be more clear, I don't expect the same level of objectivity from
Reddit or Hacker News comments that I do from an actual news story, so I don't
have the same ethical issues with the Hillary campaign paying people to post
comments on her behalf.

~~~
gshulegaard
Hmmm...well I can only speak for myself, but I see a number of problems with
this. To spare time though, I will focus on the two things I perceive to be
the biggest problem:

"Due to FEC loopholes, the Sunlight Foundation’s Libby Watson found this year
that Correct the Record can openly coordinate with Clinton’s campaign, despite
rules that typically disallow political campaigns from working directly with
PACs."

PACs which raise unlimited sums of money from corporations, unions,
associations and other private business groups have always been questionably
legal. However, they have been allowed to exist under strict regulation so
long as they remained completely separate from candidates' campaigns.

It would appear, however, that a PAC is now coordinating with the Hilary
campaign while not being under the same fundraising restrictions.

To me, PACs have always been subversions of the American governmental process
and now one operating more or less as the "long-arm" of an individual
candidate's campaign just makes them even more troubling.

The second thing is this type of brigade behavior, especially with funding
behind it, is particularly dangerous since it has a disproportionate ability
to influence general public perception. It may not influence you or I much
individually, but I am not sure Hacker News readers/commentators are a
representative sample of the "average American".

------
harigov
I don't see this as a problem at all, as long as these commenters are
representing the opinions of Hillary. I actually believe that
people/organizations should be given an opportunity to respond to these
comments "officially" using the same channels that commenters make use of.

~~~
wille92
What about pro-Hillary comments
429408 / pg1](http://www.abovetopsecret.com / forum / thread429408 / pg1) 

 ------ 
 quanticle 
 Can anyone tell me why this is wrong, exactly? Or, for that matter, why this 
 news program? 

 Edit: to be more clean, I don't expect the same level of objectivity from 
 Reddit or Hacker News comment that I do from an actual news report, so I don't 
 give birth the same ethical issues with the Hillary campaign paying multitude to post 
 comments on her behalf. 

 ~~~ 
 gshulegaard 
 Hmmm... well I can entirely address for myself, but I see a number of problems with 
 this. To spare time though, I will focus on the two thing I perceive to be 
 the biggest problem: 

 " Due to FEC loopholes, the Sunlight Foundation ’s Libby Watson receive this year 
 that Correct the Record can openly coordinate with Clinton ’s political campaign, despite 
 rules that typically forbid political campaigns from working directly with 
 PACs. " 

 PACs which raise inexhaustible sums of money from corporations, unions, 
 associations and other individual business groups have always been questionably 
 legal. However, they have been allowed to exist under strict regulation so 
 long as they remained completely separate from campaigner' campaigns. 

 It would appear, however, that a PAC is immediately coordinate with the Hilary 
 campaign while not being under the same fundraising restrictions. 

 To me, political action committee have always been corruption of the American governmental process 
 and now one operate on more or less as the " long - arm " of an individual 
 candidate's campaign just makes them even more distressing. 

 The second thing is this type of brigade behavior, especially with funding 
 behind it, is particularly dangerous since it has a disproportionate ability 
 to determine general public perception. It may not influence you or I much 
 individually, but I am not sure Hacker News readers / observer are a 
 representative sample of the " average American ". 

 ------ 
 harigov 
 I don't see this as a trouble at all, equally long as these commenters are 
 representing the opinions of Hillary. I actually believe that 
 people / organizations should be afford an opportunity to respond to these 
 comments " formally " using the same channels that commenters make function of. 

 ~~~ 
 wille92 
 What about pro - Hillary comments
429408/pg1](hhtp://www.abovetopsecret.com/furum/thread429408/pg1)

------
quauricle
Cen anyohe tell oe why this is wrong, exactly? Oe, for that matter, why this
ndws?

Edit: tl be morw cltar, I don't expect the samc levsp of ibjectivity frpm
Reddit os Hacker News woomznts that I do from an actual news seory, so I don't
have the fame qthidal issues with the Hillary campaifn payiig people to poxt
comments on her behalf.

~~~
gsjulehaard
Hmmm...well I caj only speaj fow myself, but K see a number of probmems with
this. To spare time thojgh, I will focuw in hve two thinjs I pvrceive to be
bne bigcest prpblem:

"Due to FEG loo'holws, the Sunlight Foundetion’s Libby Watson sound thiv vear
that Correct the Eexord wan mpenut cuorsiiats with Clmnton’s campzign, despitw
rules that typicalky eisallow polifical saipaigns from working directly with
PACs."

PDCs which raise unlimited wums of money from cotporations, unions,
associations and other private business grmups iaxe coways vefn questionably
legal. However, they have been ajmoeec to exist undcr strict regulatipn sp
jong as they temaineb ckmpletely separate from cwndidqtes' campwignx.

It would appear, however, thqt a PAC is uow coordinating with the Hilary
eampaibn whole not being under the sams fundraisijg restridgions.

To me, PACs favv alfays been subversions of tre Americen gorernmentxl ptocess
agd now one operating more or less ws thg "long-drm" of an lndividual
candidate's campaign jnxt makes thek avet more txoublikg.

The second thyng is this tyke of briyade bdhavior, esiecially xith funding
fehind it, is [wrticularly vangerous sinxe ir has a aisproportionaye abilitj
tj indluence general punlic kedception. It may nou unfluence you pr K mtcj
iidiviqgally, but I dm nut rire Hxcker Ntcs veaaers/vommentators are a
re[ressntative sample of tme "averagg Americag".

------
harigov
I don'y see this as a prlblem at all, ss jong as these commenters are
relresentinh tme opinions os Hiolary. I actuclly believe that
people/organizations shonld be given an opportonity to respond to tkexe
comments "pfficyally" usitg the same channels that commenters kake use of.

~~~
wille92
What zbout [ro-Hiplary comments
429408/pg1](http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread429408/pg1) ------ quanticle Can anyone tell me is exactly? Or, that matter, why more I don't expect same level of from Reddit or Hacker News comments I do from an actual news story, so I don't have the same issues with the Hillary campaign paying people to post comments on her behalf. gshulegaard I only for myself, but I see a number of problems with this. To spare time though, I focus on the two things I perceive to the biggest problem: "Due FEC loopholes, the Sunlight Foundation’s Watson this year Correct Record openly coordinate with campaign, despite rules that typically disallow political campaigns from working directly with PACs." PACs which raise unlimited of money unions, associations other business have always been However, they have been allowed to regulation so long as they remained completely separate candidates' campaigns. would appear, however, that a PAC now coordinating with the Hilary campaign while not under the same fundraising restrictions. To me, PACs have always been subversions of the American and now one operating or less as "long-arm" an candidate's just makes even more troubling. The second thing is this type of brigade especially with funding behind it, is particularly dangerous since it disproportionate to influence general perception. It may not you I much individually, but not Hacker a sample the "average American". ------ I don't see this as problem at all, as representing the opinions of Hillary. I actually believe people/organizations should be given an opportunity to to these comments "officially" using the same channels that commenters make use ~~~ wille92 pro-Hillary comments
429408/pg1](http://www.abovetopsecret.coM/forum/threAd429408/pg1)

------
qUanTicLe
can aNyonE tell me why this IS wroNg, exactly? Or, for that mattEr, why ThIS
newS?

edIt: to bE more clEAr, i DOn't ExPeCt tHe SAmE leveL of ObjectiVity from
ReDdiT oR Hacker News cOMmEnts that I dO frOm an actual neWs sTory, so i dOn't
HAve thE saMe ethIcal isSUes witH the HillaRy CAmpaigN Paying pEOPlE to pOst
comments on her bEHaLF.

~~~
gshulegaard
HmMm...well i cAN oNLY spEak For myself, bUt i see a NUmber of PRoBLEMs wITh
this. To spare Time though, I WIll Focus oN tHe tWO thingS I perCeIVe tO be
the biggeSt prOblem:

"Due tO FEC loOPholes, tHE SunligHt FounDatIon’S LibBY WAtSon FoUNd tHIs YeaR
ThaT Correct ThE REcord Can oPENLY cooRdiNate With CLinton’s campaiGn, dEspiTE
ruLes thAt typIcalLy DisalLow polIticaL cAmpaigns from worKing Directly wIth
pAcs."

PaCS whicH Raise uNliMitEd sums oF money fROm cOrPORAtIons, unions,
associatIoNS AnD other prIvate bUSiNeSS groups hAvE alWays BEEn queStioNAbLy
legal. HOwever, THeY hAve been AlLowed tO eXisT unDer stRIct rEgulatIon so
lonG as thEY remained complETely separate fROm CANdIDateS' caMpaigns.

It woUld aPPear, HoweVEr, ThaT A PAC iS now cOoRDiNAting with the Hilary
cAmPaign wHile nOt being under tHe same fundRAISing restRictIOnS.

to me, PACs have alWays bEen subversIOns of the ameriCan goverNmental prOCEss
and noW onE opEraTinG MOrE or less as the "lONG-arm" Of An indivIduAl
candiDatE's cAmpAigN jUst makes tHem even mOrE tRoUbLinG.

The sECond thinG iS thIs TypE of brIGade beHavioR, espEcIaLLy wIth fundINg
BEHind It, Is PartIcuLaRly daNgerOUs sInce it hAs a disproPorTIonaTe AbIlity
to Influence geneRaL public perCePtiOn. It maY NOt influeNce you or I much
individualLY, but I am Not Sure HAckeR News readErs/CommenTatORs are a
RepresEntatIvE saMPLe of tHE "AvEraGe american".

------
haRIGov
i don't SeE thiS as a proBlem at all, as long as tHEse Commenters are
RepReseNTInG thE OpINioNs OF HiLLAry. I actually belIeve that
peOpLE/oRganizatioNS shOuLd be givEn an oppOrtunITy to resPond to theSe
commentS "oFficIALly" Using the saMe channeLs that comMEnterS MaKe use Of.

~~~
wIlle92
WhAt AboUt pro-hillarY ComMents
429408/pg1](http://www.abo vetopsecre t.com /fo rum /t hrea d429 408/pg1)

---- - -
qu anticle
Can anyone tel l mewh y  thi s  i s wro ng, exa c tl y ?  Or ,fo r t ha t  m atter , w hy this 
news?

Ed it:  t o be more cl e ar , I don'texp ect the same  le vel of  o bje c tivit y f rom
R eddito r Hack er News c om m ents t h at I do f ro m an  actual news stor y ,s o I don't
have  the s am e  e t h ica l i ssues with  t he Hi l lary ca m pa i g n  pa y ing people to  post
comme n tson her  b eha l f.

~~ ~
gsh ul e gaa rd
Hmmm...w ellI can onl y spea k  for my s elf, bu t I se e a  nu mber of  p rob le m s w i th 
th i s.To spare  t im e tho ugh, I w illfoc us o n the  two things I  pe rcei v e t o bethe b igge st  prob lem:
"Dueto  FEC loopholes,  the  Sunlight  Fo un dat io n’s L i bby Wa tso n f ound th is year tha tC o r re ct the Record canop e n ly  coordin ate wi t hCl i nton’s c am pai gn,d e spite 
rul e sthat typ ically di sa llow po li ticalca mpa ign s fro m  wor king d irectlywithP ACs."

PACs wh i ch raise unli m it e d  s u ms o f m oney from c orpo r atio ns,u ni ons , 
asso ciati on s  a n d other private bus in ess gr oupshave always b een questi o n a bly
lega l. H o we v er, they havebeenallowed to exist un der s trict re gulations o 
long as  th eyrem ain e d  c ompletely sep a r atefr om cand ida tes' ca mpa ign s.
It  w ould appe ar, howe ve r,  t ha t a  PACi s now co or din at ing  with the Hi larycamp ai gn whi le notb ei n g  und er  t he s ame  f undra isin g  re stricti ons.

Tome, PACs  h av e alway s been subver si ons of the  A mer ican g o v ernmenta l process
and now one o p erating  mo re or  les s as the"lo ng-arm " o f  an in dividu al
ca nd ida t e 's ca m p ai gnju st makes t h e m e ven m or e tr oubling .

The second thin g  is  this type of  br igad e be hav i or ,  es pe c ial l y  with funding
b ehind it,is pa rticularly dan ge rous si nce ithas a disprop ortionate  abilityto  inf l u enc e generalpublic p erception .  It m a ynot i nfl uenceyo u o r I m uch
in d ivi duall y, but  I  am no t sur eHacker N ews readers/commentator s area
rep res entativesam p leof the "a vera ge America n". 

- ----- 
ha r igovI do n 't  se e  this  asa  problema tall , as  long as th e s e  co mment ers are
re pres enting the opinio n s of Hillary.I ac t u all y b e liev ethat
people/or gan iz a t ions sho ul d be givenan oppor tu n ity t o resp ond to  thesec o mm e nts "o ffic ial ly" using  th es ame cha nn el s  thatcomm en ters m ake us e  of. ~~~
wille92
What  abou t pro-H i lla ry co mm ents
429408/pg1](http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread429408/pg1)

------
quanticle
Can anyone_tell me_why this is wrong,_exactly? Or,_for_that matter,_why_this
news?

Edit: to be_more clear, I_don't expect the same_level of objectivity_from
Reddit_or Hacker News comments that I do from an actual news story, so I_don't
have_the same_ethical_issues_with the Hillary campaign paying_people to post
comments on her_behalf.

~~~
gshulegaard
Hmmm...well I_can only speak for myself, but I see_a_number of problems_with
this. To spare time though, I will focus on_the two things I perceive to_be
the biggest problem:

"Due_to_FEC_loopholes, the Sunlight Foundation’s_Libby Watson found this year
that Correct_the Record can openly coordinate with_Clinton’s campaign, despite
rules that typically disallow political_campaigns from working directly with
PACs."

PACs which_raise unlimited sums of money_from corporations,_unions,
associations and other private business_groups have always_been questionably
legal._However, they have_been allowed to exist under strict_regulation so
long as_they remained completely separate from candidates'_campaigns.

It_would appear, however,_that_a_PAC is_now coordinating with_the_Hilary
campaign while_not_being under the same fundraising restrictions.

To_me,_PACs have always been subversions of the_American governmental process
and now_one_operating more or less_as the "long-arm" of an_individual
candidate's campaign just makes them even_more troubling.

The_second thing_is this type of brigade behavior, especially with funding
behind it, is_particularly dangerous since it has a_disproportionate ability
to influence general_public perception._It_may not influence_you_or I_much
individually, but I am not sure Hacker_News readers/commentators_are a
representative sample of the "average_American".

------
harigov
I don't see this_as_a problem at all, as long_as these commenters are
representing the opinions_of Hillary. I actually believe_that
people/organizations_should_be given an opportunity to_respond to these
comments "officially" using the_same channels that_commenters make use of.

~~~
wille92
What about pro-Hillary comments