Yes, please.
I want the facility to censor. I want and need to exercise it all the time.
I start with the headline, taking one full second of my time and attention. Not interested? Skip it (censored). I'll never know what lied (lay) within. So be it.
Content? I might load one or two of the first 30 pages pointed to by /active, but I'll rollover first, and my personal censor will often reject loading of certain sites, based solely on their URLs.
Comments, finally... active pages get the most comments, and there's a lot to learn here, so it's often worth the effort and the time to segregate the wheat from the chaff, the signal from the noise. This requires the usual selective reading: the first sentence of the first paragraph determines whether the rest of the graph will be consumed, parsed into a gist, or skip the rest. Only slow down for recognized experts (or inherent/exhibited expertise). Build a quick TL;DR as you scan, backtrack if you find a nugget. Panning for gold!
Not censorship based on 'a tribal mentality' but a pure self-interest in not wasting the limited time I have at my disposal. Wanting knowledge and insight and perspective, not willing to slog through regurgitated shittalking.
> We’ve reached a point where people cannot tolerate
Exactly.
I agree with the post, but don't find it surprising. If you have problems with companies these guys are invested in, probably find a different platform that they don't run?
Seriously, we could do this on IRC without hard gatekeeping...
The author is concerned that content which would be valuable to the 'tech-scene' by virtue of demonstrable ability to gain traction quickly is being suppressed due to site owners wanting to avoid damaging their investments.
I mean: We're all free to have a drink from the proverbial firehose any time we want.
It's right over here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newest
Obviously, this must the result of proactive, willful censorship or maybe some kind of deep-state conspiracy.
By extension, it could never have been the result of HN's automated flamewar detector reacting to 29 of the 145 comments being from just one user who seemed to spend most of their efforts telling others that they were wrong.
(That user may in fact be authoritative on the topic, but it looks like a flamewar from my own 10,000-foot overview of this discussion that I have zero personal interest in.)
However, the complaint the author made was not related to the post that you linked. The flagging and unflagging occurred on this post [1].
Was there some other aspect to this blog post under this article under this very posting, here, at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46312812, that is more in question -- perhaps one that I missed?
Did I not read deep-enough into the rant?
(If I did not, then I'm really not sure how much I care. But I do suspect that my care is approximately zero for the output of someone who very deliberately puts overtly-patronizing, browser-fucking shit like this on their blog: https://imgur.com/a/bOkSsd4 )
I’ve seen this happen to many interesting posts and not a big fan, but this is connected to a business after all.
DivingForGold•1mo ago