4 ms·
I tend to agree, but having pushed on this in the past, the answer from the mods is usually "these topics tend to spawn flamewars." I've been loquacious to Dang
by existencebox 8y ago
I tend to agree, but having pushed on this in the past, the answer from the mods is usually "these topics tend to spawn flamewars." I've been loquacious to Dang in the past that I think flags are increasingly used "Selectively" to quash certain discussions. What's interesting is that normally it's counter-mainstream stances on e.g. diversity in tech that get vanished; HN has typically not been super friendly of trump, but the complete lack of discussion on a topic that very essentially phrases "our president _is in fact a crook_" (wording chosen very intentionally) does strike me oddly as well, this writeup was not some emotional tirade or lacking in detail/rigor.
I'm actually very curious to ask some older friends of mine who were alive in 69' whether there was the same amount of "avoidance of third-rail-topics" during that precedent.
- severine 8y agoWell, the mods could expand a bit more. Some example from the mods at MetaFilter: [Folks, let's not go down the well-trod roads of "probably civil war is inevitable" or "ugh these fuckers, let's look deep into their souls" - let's try to keep the signal high in here, focusing on updates on actual current events,] [We have been around and around the armchair-diagnosis merry-go-round and it is not going anywhere. Let's get off.] [Folks, debating whether or not someone is credible about their own sexual assault is not a debate we need to have, even if everyone's just agreeing with each other. Let's move on. Thanks. ] But this, this is just gaslighting. It's scary.