3 ms·

I agree that conversations get more contentious and less productive when these things are brought up, but if it was a point made in the article it is arguably l

I agree that conversations get more contentious and less productive when these things are brought up, but if it was a point made in the article it is arguably less productive to discussion to just ignore it and not bring it up at all. We are talking about the article after all, and the article says what it says.

dang 5y ago
With issues like that I always return to the first principle of HN: we're trying to optimize this site for intellectual curiosity (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=curiosity%20optimiz%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...). Since that's the overriding value, the answer easily follows: if there's something that gratifies intellectual curiosity in an article, bring that up and let discussion flow from there; if there's nothing that gratifies intellectual curiosity, then the article is off topic and should be flagged. Either way, we should abstain from predictable provocations and tedious flamewars. They may feel intense and exciting for a while but they lead to a degraded and ultimately boring forum. Most articles are a mixed bag: they (hopefully) contain things that can lead to interesting conversation, and they often also contain provocations that will lead to angry, repetitive arguments if amplified. We don't, for example, need yet another generic ideological flamewar. There's no curiosity in those. Therefore, "it's in the article" is not by itself a good reason for bringing something into a thread here. If an article is burning in places, that does not mean that we should import the flames. Seed discussion with the least predictable, most curious aspects of an article, not the ones that point to hell.
- betwixthewires 5y ago
  I agree the article should be flagged, it is a low quality article lean on information and insight, it doesn't even offer an interesting perspective.
  - dang 5y ago
    Perhaps we should downweight major media opinion pieces. They seem mostly not to be very good for HN.

dang 5y ago

With issues like that I always return to the first principle of HN: we're trying to optimize this site for intellectual curiosity (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=curiosity%20optimiz%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...). Since that's the overriding value, the answer easily follows: if there's something that gratifies intellectual curiosity in an article, bring that up and let discussion flow from there; if there's nothing that gratifies intellectual curiosity, then the article is off topic and should be flagged. Either way, we should abstain from predictable provocations and tedious flamewars. They may feel intense and exciting for a while but they lead to a degraded and ultimately boring forum. Most articles are a mixed bag: they (hopefully) contain things that can lead to interesting conversation, and they often also contain provocations that will lead to angry, repetitive arguments if amplified. We don't, for example, need yet another generic ideological flamewar. There's no curiosity in those. Therefore, "it's in the article" is not by itself a good reason for bringing something into a thread here. If an article is burning in places, that does not mean that we should import the flames. Seed discussion with the least predictable, most curious aspects of an article, not the ones that point to hell.

betwixthewires 5y ago
I agree the article should be flagged, it is a low quality article lean on information and insight, it doesn't even offer an interesting perspective.
- dang 5y ago
  Perhaps we should downweight major media opinion pieces. They seem mostly not to be very good for HN.