5 ms·

IMO this post should not be on HN. Per the guidelines [1] "stories about politics" are off-topic. I would consider this political for obvious reasons. [1] http

by mmglr 6y ago

IMO this post should not be on HN. Per the guidelines [1] "stories about politics" are off-topic. I would consider this political for obvious reasons. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
seesawtron 6y ago
Here's the complete guideline: "Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon" Did you purposefully leave out the full sentence? I would argue it is/was a new phenomenon. Nevertheless, would like to hear why you think HN should be exempt from political discussion anyways? We see thought-provoking discussions here each day. This is one of the positive aspects of HN that I value that it allows you to be politically and socially aware of ideas to get you out of your role as an "engineer" or "hacker".
- mmglr 6y ago
  I wasn’t intending to be malicious by leaving out the full sentence. Fair point about being a new phenomenon.
- busterarm 6y ago
  Yes, hackernews will never pass up the opportunity to discuss highly divisive content that will cause community drama. Let's post about rent control while we're at it and really set off some flamewars.
  - seesawtron 6y ago
    I thought you were against censorship as your bio says: "Censors have never been on the right side of history. If you support censorship, consider that you may be advocating evil." If this was a sarcastic bio, then forgive me for misunderstanding.
    - busterarm 6y ago
      Censorship isn't the same as having community rules for positive discussion and sticking to them. The latter implies consent -- if you don't agree with the rules, participate and voice your speech somewhere else. You can be a free speech absolutist and still think it's a bad idea to shout fire in a theater. Being against censorship doesn't mean you welcome anyone into your home to shout whatever the heck they want. Also, perhaps you should review them again: Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents. Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something. Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. That destroys the curiosity this site exists for.
iso947 6y ago
This is about religion, what does that have to do with politics?

by mmglr 6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

seesawtron 6y ago

Here's the complete guideline: "Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon" Did you purposefully leave out the full sentence? I would argue it is/was a new phenomenon. Nevertheless, would like to hear why you think HN should be exempt from political discussion anyways? We see thought-provoking discussions here each day. This is one of the positive aspects of HN that I value that it allows you to be politically and socially aware of ideas to get you out of your role as an "engineer" or "hacker".

mmglr 6y ago
I wasn’t intending to be malicious by leaving out the full sentence. Fair point about being a new phenomenon.
busterarm 6y ago
Yes, hackernews will never pass up the opportunity to discuss highly divisive content that will cause community drama. Let's post about rent control while we're at it and really set off some flamewars.
- seesawtron 6y ago
  I thought you were against censorship as your bio says: "Censors have never been on the right side of history. If you support censorship, consider that you may be advocating evil." If this was a sarcastic bio, then forgive me for misunderstanding.
  - busterarm 6y ago
    Censorship isn't the same as having community rules for positive discussion and sticking to them. The latter implies consent -- if you don't agree with the rules, participate and voice your speech somewhere else. You can be a free speech absolutist and still think it's a bad idea to shout fire in a theater. Being against censorship doesn't mean you welcome anyone into your home to shout whatever the heck they want. Also, perhaps you should review them again: Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents. Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something. Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. That destroys the curiosity this site exists for.

iso947 6y ago

This is about religion, what does that have to do with politics?