HN is strongly moderated, censored, has a biased ranking system and a very biased community. It's not a matter of fair. It is what it is, and it works the way

HN is strongly moderated, censored, has a biased ranking system and a very biased community. It's not a matter of fair. It is what it is, and it works the way the owners and most users like it. And it is done very, very well. Personally, I think the bias has become so strong that the lack of a viable alternative or reddit-style autonomous subs is really starting to grate. HN has become a homogenous echo chamber in which saying the "wrong" thing will get you buried or even slow/shadow banned. But usually the manipulation is more subtle in avoiding those discussions altogether, and this may be a typical example of that. (Which in itself would an excellent example of good, subtle moderation.) The great irony is that on a platform that considers politics to be off-topic, political and ideological bias dominates almost everything but the most neutral of scientific and technological topics. But I suspect most HN-ers, including the moderators, are barely aware of that bias because they operate inside a bubble of like-minded people within a very narrow ideological spectrum. But "fair" doesn't come into it. It works as intended.