4 ms·
The funny thing is, most of those HN threads have a top comment with a link to an archived/visible copy of the article, making it easier to access that link tha
by ysavir 5y ago
The funny thing is, most of those HN threads have a top comment with a link to an archived/visible copy of the article, making it easier to access that link than if found in other places.
Other than that, HN articles are upvoted to the front page, not there naturally, and if enough people are commenting/upvoting, I think that indicated it's worth sharing despite the paywall.
And sometimes the best discussion derives from the subject in the headline without any actual relation to the article itself, and I'd hate to lose out on that discussion due to rules or automatic filtering.
I know it's frustrating, and I'm been blocked out of reading those articles on HN a daily basis, but I still prefer the status quo to one where those subjects and deriving discussions never have a chance in the first place.
- 0des 5y agoIve chosen not to use archive links. If a publisher uses paywalls, the message is clear.
- sofixa 5y agoThat they prefer not to rely on clickbait, user data and intrusive ads?
- 0des 5y agoPardon me for asking; is this a question?
- sofixa 5y agoKind of. What's the clear message you deduce from a publisher having a paywall?
- 0des 5y ago"This is not content for the greater un-vetted public" in my opinion it squelches the voice of an otherwise informed outsider, and narrows the conversational possibilities to those who agree with the author ostensibly because they pay a subscription. Whether intentional or not, paywalls are ideological filters in outcome.
- ysavir 5y agoI thought the message was "we want your money"