zlacker

>>xslowz+(OP)
I think that HN itself also shadow flags submissions from a list of domains it doesn't like.

Try submitting a URL from the following domains, and it will be automatically flagged (but you can't see it's flagged unless you log out):

  - archive.is
  - watcher.guru
  - stacker.news
  - zerohedge.com
  - freebeacon.com
  - thefederalist.com
  - breitbart.com

>>mutant+l1
Well, yes, many sites are banned on HN. Others are penalized (see e.g. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...). None of this is secret, though we don't publish the lists themselves.

Edit: about 67k sites are banned on HN. Here's a random selection of 10 of them:

  vodlockertv.com
  biggboss.org
  infoocode.com
  newyorkpersonalinjuryattorneyblog.com
  moringajuice.wordpress.com
  surrogacymumbai.com
  maximizedlivingdrlabrecque.com
  radio.com
  gossipcare.com
  tecteem.com

>>dang+p1
And you don't see that as censorship?

>>mutant+s1
The word censorship has so many meanings that I have to ask what you mean by it before I can say whether I see it that way.

Is it censorship that the rules of chess say you can't poke someone's queen off the board? We're trying to play a particular game here.

>>dang+q2
> The word censorship has so many meanings that I have to ask what you mean by it before I can say whether I see it that way.

Perhaps its one of those things that are hard to define. [1] But that doesn't mean clear cases don't exist.

> Is it censorship that the rules of chess say you can't poke someone's queen off the board? We're trying to play a particular game here.

No, but it is clearly political censorship if you only apply the unwritten and secret "rules" of the game to a particular political faction. Also, banning entire domain names is definitely heavy-handed.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it