> You seem to be new here That's an emotionally manipulative way of dismissing their points that doesn't contribute to your argument, or to the site in general

> You seem to be new here That's an emotionally manipulative way of dismissing their points that doesn't contribute to your argument, or to the site in general. > what you are referring to are not rules, they are guidelines That's semantics. When the "guidelines" are regularly adjusted, and when users are chastised or banned by the mods for not following them (even if not to the letter, but to the spirit of the law), then they are effectively rules. > because what is old and uninteresting to some is new and interesting to others. > you're robbing others of an opportunity to learn something new The scope of HN is not "everything that is new and interesting", nor is the point to "give others an opportunity to learn something new". The guidelines, and moderators, are pretty clear that there are new and interesting stories that are off-topic because they veer into mainstream political news territory that invariably leads into flamewars that degrade the quality of the site. There is a very good reason that politics are strongly discouraged/forbidden in the guidelines, and that users (including me) actively flag those posts: because that kind of discussion actively erodes and polarizes the community. > when you do it, you're acting based on your own preferences No, we're acting based on a basic understanding of human nature and experience with what happens when political stories make it through. The fact that you weren't able to answer Esophagus4's points and data in the other comment shows that your position isn't defensible.