I think there are 4 categories of topics 1) ideological (including political (globa/local), or religious 2) technical 3) personal (meaning focus is, specific

I think there are 4 categories of topics 1) ideological (including political (globa/local), or religious 2) technical 3) personal (meaning focus is, specifically, on subjective position) 4) moral (meaning, focus is on subjective, but relatable at a group/society/era level) Problem is with ( 1 ), and may be ( 4 ). My personal view, is that if HN is to allow new submissions where (1) and (4) are present. Those submissions should go through a different flow, than (2) and (3). These submissions should be marked as such, then reviewed by a moderator, to see if it fits the broader category of HN-allowed submissions. And then, if the submission passes moderation, the discussion on those posts cannot follow same upvote/downvote model as ( 2 ) or (3). Because regular upvote/downvote model puts at disadvantage minority view. -- -- WRT your question > Let me ask you a question, though you don't have to answer it. Do you feel like HN is biased against the point of view you yourself favor Yes, I think selection of submissions, downvotes and flags favors disproportionally to anti-Trump, anti-Brexit, anti-Kavanaugh, anti-male rhetoric. I particular share a view of environment issues, though I favor non-global, trade-based solutions. So I, personally do remember incidents where my submissions or comments were downvoted on that topic. Interestingly, on more political conservative forums, that I participate on -- when I argue a pro-environment position -- I get some pushback, sometime ridicule -- but my comments never 'grayed out' or flagged. -- Sorry for a long, response. But yes. I favor particular ideology and moral stance. Everybody has those positions. I also appreciate, particularly, flexibility of mind and personal ability to adjust to something different if circumstances or new information dictates that. I have yet to find any discussion that would cause me a shift in my positions on (1) or (4). I suspect this is same with other people, but being tested by questions, or telling others what I think -- is engaging, nevertheless. Another thing, I noticed, that I tend to use 'reciprocal' tone. So the actual tone would depend on some selection/aggregation of other folks tone. My overall complaint, if I may call it that, is flagging/graying out expressions that are conservative-leaning.