By the literal definition of censorship, you are correct. HN, and most social media, make decisions about what gets shown and what doesn't. Any filtering, moder

By the literal definition of censorship, you are correct. HN, and most social media, make decisions about what gets shown and what doesn't. Any filtering, moderation, or removal of any content where the goal is to make things better (and so implies the removed item was in the way of good) is technically censorship. Even the likes of spam filtering is censorship. It is removal of objectionable content after all. But there's connotations to the term censorship that make it carry a stronger implied moral, or indeed political, judgement than terms like "filter" in contexts like this one. Maybe that's exactly what you wanted to communicate. However, as phrased, it's more likely to get a knee-jerk downvote rather than a reasoned response. Which is exactly why I chose to respond, I'd rather see a discussion on the topic rather than either your comment being ignored or removed. After all, that's why I come to HN, it censors in favor of discourse, and though it's imperfect, it does far better in practice than any other site I know of.