4 ms·

I can't tell you for sure why 50 people upvoted it, but I can say why I posted it (and why I originally expanded on the given title): because unlike a lot of ot

by blahedo 16y ago

I can't tell you for sure why 50 people upvoted it, but I can say why I posted it (and why I originally expanded on the given title): because unlike a lot of other articles about drug prohibition (pro or con) or other side non-computer topics (TSA, etc) of some interest to some HN readers, this one specifically explores its effect on average people. Not on crime or prison or nonviolent offenders or "real drug" users (we've heard a lot about all that), but on people who take what the French would call médicaments rather than drogues---which is a lot of people---and on the deeper implications of the "drug war" on their lives, their relationships with the law, and their interactions with police. Also the AS stuff, which is interesting, but it's background and setup for the main argument of the essay. Also, the original title is not very descriptive and not only doesn't tell you its thesis, it doesn't even tell you which drug-related topic it's about.

tptacek 16y ago
If there's one person on HN who doesn't think drug prohibition is an ongoing tragedy, I'd be surprised to see them say it. If everyone is just going to find different (and prickly) ways to agree with the thesis of an article, and it's not directly germane to HN, I don't think it belongs here. "Illustrating the true dimensions of a tragedy" is not a back door for political/public-policy issues. Here is, I think, a valid acid test: * Does the story generate genuine debate in the comments about the core idea in the story? (Not really.) * Do the story itself mention Obama? (No.) * Do the comments mention Obama? (Yes.) ... then something's wrong with the story for HN. Not every good story has a home here.
- blahedo 16y ago
  > Does the story generate genuine debate in the comments about the core idea in the story? Well, I would have liked to see some debate about the nature of police states and what sorts of police actions make a population as a whole more rather than less likely to go to the police with their problems... ...but everyone was too busy arguing over whether the story belongs on HN to get that far. Um, my bad, I guess.
  - tptacek 16y ago
    What debate? Seriously: you want a debate about something that virtually everyone on HN agrees about. There are right-leaning and left-leaning people alike on HN, but even Daniel Markham opposes the police state. Are we debating just to hear ourselves talk? The question of whether stories like this belong on HN or not is more interesting than the other questions being discussed here, because at least this question has opposing interests and can lead to a conclusion of some sort.

by blahedo 16y ago

tptacek 16y ago

If there's one person on HN who doesn't think drug prohibition is an ongoing tragedy, I'd be surprised to see them say it. If everyone is just going to find different (and prickly) ways to agree with the thesis of an article, and it's not directly germane to HN, I don't think it belongs here. "Illustrating the true dimensions of a tragedy" is not a back door for political/public-policy issues. Here is, I think, a valid acid test: * Does the story generate genuine debate in the comments about the core idea in the story? (Not really.) * Do the story itself mention Obama? (No.) * Do the comments mention Obama? (Yes.) ... then something's wrong with the story for HN. Not every good story has a home here.

blahedo 16y ago
> Does the story generate genuine debate in the comments about the core idea in the story? Well, I would have liked to see some debate about the nature of police states and what sorts of police actions make a population as a whole more rather than less likely to go to the police with their problems... ...but everyone was too busy arguing over whether the story belongs on HN to get that far. Um, my bad, I guess.
- tptacek 16y ago
  What debate? Seriously: you want a debate about something that virtually everyone on HN agrees about. There are right-leaning and left-leaning people alike on HN, but even Daniel Markham opposes the police state. Are we debating just to hear ourselves talk? The question of whether stories like this belong on HN or not is more interesting than the other questions being discussed here, because at least this question has opposing interests and can lead to a conclusion of some sort.