zlacker

>>capabl+(OP)
> Still, as an occasional reader, I have noticed certain trends. When stories that focus on structural barriers faced by women in the workplace, or on diversity in tech, or on race or masculinity—stories, admittedly, that are more intriguing to me, a person interested in the humanities, than stories on technical topics—hit the front page, users often flag them, presumably for being off topic, so fast that hardly any comments accrue.

I have noticed this trend for a long time also, and well before this article was first written. It seems to go in waves though I'll cautiously say that it seems to have gotten somewhat better in recent years. I remember a time in the mid-2010s when these kinds of stories would disappear almost instantaneously. Now some of these articles and topics get a good number of upvotes and occasionally even substantive dialogue.

That said, the comments sections on these articles do tend to devolve pretty quickly.

>>belfal+Nh
That kind of stuff has infected so much of modern discourse, if people want to talk about it there are plenty of forums for it. Why should we all stop what we're doing and prioritize discussing a niche political cause who's proponents have been blackmailing people everywhere into paying attention to them and have now come to dominate all sorts of forums and secure power, ironically with no benefit to the people they feign support for.

And when people say they want it discussed, they don't mean they want to read diverse opinions, they just mean they want to see orthodoxy regurgitated.

>>versio+Zy
Political threads often do go that way, and I understand the frustration. We don't want regurgitation—that follows from what we're trying to optimize for: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor....

But the question of how to handle politics on HN is not simple. By the same principle of trying to optimize for curiosity, some content with political overlap is interesting and belongs here. The questions are which forms of it, how much, which particular links, etc.. I feel like after 10 years we arrived at a pretty coherent and stable general answer to that. Not that we get every specific call right—we don't. But the general principle has held up.

For anyone wondering what I'm talking about, here are some past explanations:

>>22902490 (April 2020)

>>21607844 (Nov 2019)

and some related points:

>>23959679 (July 2020)

>>17014869 (May 2018)

and there are lots more at https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... covering this.

>>dang+yA
Since there was a snarky(ish??) comment about commenters quoting Socrates, I shall waste no time and jump myself to Aristotle: “Man is by nature a social animal” (Pol. 1253a). But note that that famous translation (“a social animal”) actually translates πολιτικὸν ζῷον (politikon zoon: political animal). Of course, for the ancient Greeks, politics meant something more expansive than it usually does for us. They were right. Politics, like time, is part of the human condition.

>>dmvdou+P31
When do politics begin? Three people.