zlacker

>>zdw+(OP)
What is the point of allowing discussion? HN would not allow a post on this topic from an opposing viewpoint to get to the front page. Moreover, this particular point of view is from a radical organization - you can't really have intellectual discourse with people who refuse to see any other position than theirs.

>>peterw+0b
> HN would not allow a post on this topic from an opposing viewpoint to get to the front page.

Proof?

> Moreover, this particular point of view is from a radical organization

Define "radical."

> you can't really have intellectual discourse with people who refuse to see any other position than theirs.

How does one tell if this is the case? How does one tell _which_ party refuses to see things from another position? How does one tell if it is in fact miscommunication, or lack of a shared understanding? How does one tell if in fact one of the parties is not discussing in good faith?