3 ms·

> You can see the pro-chinese propaganda on this site alone. Actually, most of the propaganda here and in social media has been anti-chinese. Obnoxiously so.

> You can see the pro-chinese propaganda on this site alone. Actually, most of the propaganda here and in social media has been anti-chinese. Obnoxiously so. > The number of people supporting Zoom, WHO, WeChat, etc is enough to conclude with near certainty this site as well is owned by the Chinese. What? Almost everything about Zoom, WHO, WeChat, etc has been negative. Even this thread has been negative. > What you're speaking is truth. It's a shame this site will censor you. Don't. The obvious victimhood propaganda won't get you very far here. > It is no coincidence so much information suppression has gone on the last 3 months... 3 months? It's been going on for many years. And I don't think it is the chinese behind it. People like you tell us that the russians and now the chinese control propaganda in the US and yet everything I read, see or hear is anti-russian and anti-chinese. Either the russians and chinese hate themselves or they are just terrible at propaganda or you are simply wrong.

nikofeyn 6y ago
> Actually, most of the propaganda here and in social media has been anti-chinese. Obnoxiously so. yes, exactly. hacker news, even more so than other sites i visit, has a very anti-chinese bend to it. however, the parent article is indeed interesting.
president 6y ago
The issue I see is not related to whether a site contains a balanced view point or not. That is up to honest moderation based on the site's guidelines. The main issue is how a site provides tools for promoting healthy discussion. As long as a submission cooperates with a site's guidelines, the site's (moral) duty after that is to ensure that people that make good use of logic, reason, facts, and sources have their voices heard. What I see sometimes on this site is that people that have legitimate arguments and authoritative sources have their posts silenced (greyed out) or flagged just because a majority group of users disagreed emotionally. To me, that is a red flag. I believe that HN tries it's best to promote healthy discourse but I also believe that there is more they can do to optimize it.

nikofeyn 6y ago

> Actually, most of the propaganda here and in social media has been anti-chinese. Obnoxiously so. yes, exactly. hacker news, even more so than other sites i visit, has a very anti-chinese bend to it. however, the parent article is indeed interesting.

president 6y ago

The issue I see is not related to whether a site contains a balanced view point or not. That is up to honest moderation based on the site's guidelines. The main issue is how a site provides tools for promoting healthy discussion. As long as a submission cooperates with a site's guidelines, the site's (moral) duty after that is to ensure that people that make good use of logic, reason, facts, and sources have their voices heard. What I see sometimes on this site is that people that have legitimate arguments and authoritative sources have their posts silenced (greyed out) or flagged just because a majority group of users disagreed emotionally. To me, that is a red flag. I believe that HN tries it's best to promote healthy discourse but I also believe that there is more they can do to optimize it.