4 ms·

Therefore we should let those with power choose what everyone can say and hear? Sorry, I'm not following.

by jfnixon 6y ago

fzeroracer 6y ago
Here's a question for you: Do you believe HN has an obligation to allow anything to be posted here? If someone wanted to post about how much they hate a certain race, do you believe the moderators here have an obligation to allow that post to remain?
- colejohnson66 6y ago
  If a majority of the population was using HN, then we’d be getting closer to an apples to apples comparison. The crux of the issue includes Google’s reach.
  - fzeroracer 6y ago
    Does it matter if the majority is using it or not? The same concept of freedom of speech should matter. And HN is one of the largest tech forums on the internet; making it effectively the 'Youtube' of tech forums. So given HN's expansive reach, why do you think it deserves to be excluded from the concept of being a provider? Why shouldn't it be forced to house all content?
    - ThrowawayR2 6y ago
      HN has negligible reach compared to Youtube, Facebook, or Google.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
quietbritishjim 6y ago
Extremely paraphrasing, ryankemper's original comment was something like "We shouldn't let private companies decide who to boot off. Besides, booting them off doesn't work anyway". Then techsupporter said something like "actually, booting them off does work". Finally, paraphrasing your comment, "so you're saying you should let private companies decide?" No, that is clearly not what techsupporter's comment meant. It's ok to disagree with the second half of that first comment ("booting them off doesn't work") without expressing an opinion on the first half. In fact the way the original comment ties together those two things has has led to the quagmire of crossed arguments you're seeing in these comments, so untying them is quite important.

4 ms·

Therefore we should let those with power choose what everyone can say and hear? Sorry, I'm not following.

by jfnixon 6y ago

Therefore we should let those with power choose what everyone can say and hear? Sorry, I'm not following.

fzeroracer 6y ago
Here's a question for you: Do you believe HN has an obligation to allow anything to be posted here? If someone wanted to post about how much they hate a certain race, do you believe the moderators here have an obligation to allow that post to remain?
- colejohnson66 6y ago
  If a majority of the population was using HN, then we’d be getting closer to an apples to apples comparison. The crux of the issue includes Google’s reach.
  - fzeroracer 6y ago
    Does it matter if the majority is using it or not? The same concept of freedom of speech should matter. And HN is one of the largest tech forums on the internet; making it effectively the 'Youtube' of tech forums. So given HN's expansive reach, why do you think it deserves to be excluded from the concept of being a provider? Why shouldn't it be forced to house all content?
    - ThrowawayR2 6y ago
      HN has negligible reach compared to Youtube, Facebook, or Google.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
quietbritishjim 6y ago
Extremely paraphrasing, ryankemper's original comment was something like "We shouldn't let private companies decide who to boot off. Besides, booting them off doesn't work anyway". Then techsupporter said something like "actually, booting them off does work". Finally, paraphrasing your comment, "so you're saying you should let private companies decide?" No, that is clearly not what techsupporter's comment meant. It's ok to disagree with the second half of that first comment ("booting them off doesn't work") without expressing an opinion on the first half. In fact the way the original comment ties together those two things has has led to the quagmire of crossed arguments you're seeing in these comments, so untying them is quite important.