3 ms·

This is getting flagged, I suspect because of the contents of the tweet. I think this is a discussion which needs to be had, though. Not a discussion of anyth

This is getting flagged, I suspect because of the contents of the tweet. I think this is a discussion which needs to be had, though. Not a discussion of anything related to trans biology, which doesn't belong here, but of Twitter meddling in the politics of other nations by enforcing a California Democrat's idea of acceptable speech on other people. Twitter has accounts like @10DowningStreet and @POTUS, which are de facto government organs. It has become a global commons for politics, and this is a very awkward fit for enforcing rules which are primarily designed to keep frog emojis and rainbow-flag emojis from yelling slurs at each other.

grzm 5y ago
> "I think this is a discussion which needs to be had, though." How do you foresee this discussion being different than the one about Nigeria and Twitter [1] or Trump and Facebook [2] (both within the past day or so), modulo some details? Coupled with the distraction that you yourself pointed out, I think this is an ongoing discussion (has been for years on HN), and will likely be unchanged with this particular entry. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27404125 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27404125 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27395366 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27395366
happytoexplain 5y ago
>discussion of anything related to trans biology, which doesn't belong here There are plenty of purely biological topics posted that stimulate curiosity or the intellect. It's the users that decide, collectively, what counts as on topic and what doesn't. If an article about trans biology was posted that didn't produce tons of snide sarcasm and identity politics in the comments (admittedly unlikely), I wouldn't flag it.