3 ms·

The source title was good: "How Airbnb's Data hid the Facts in New York City". This is a damning article for AirBnB and they need to respond. Let's not try to h

• dang 11y ago
  The article was at #2 on the front page when I went to sleep last night, i.e. far from hidden, and we didn't penalize it. (HN has a longstanding policy of penalizing stories less, not more, when they say something negative about YC or YC companies. That's the first thing PG brought up when he taught me how to moderate the site.) That doesn't mean we turn off moderation altogether, though. Many commenters were pointing out that the article's claims about wrongdoing exceeded the evidence it presented. In such cases it's normal HN practice to replace a tendentious title with a more neutral and accurate one, preferably using representative language from the article. We do this routinely. A good title on HN is accurate and neutral. A bad title is misleading or linkbait. In my view the article's title was linkbait (making a juicy claim of wrongdoing and a reference to "The Facts" as if there is one set of Facts and they know what it is). If people feel strongly about this I'm happy to change it back, but this title replacement is so standard and the current title so much more factual that it would clearly be a breach of normal practice to do so.