zlacker

Yes, starting a flamewar about abortion is a big generic tangent, and throwing in flamebait like "Thanks Apple!" makes this particularly clear.

"Generic" in this context has to do with replacing a specific topic with a larger, more general one that it perhaps has some connection to. The problem from an HN point of view is that it makes discussion less interesting and more flame-prone. The generic topics drown out the smaller ones the way a black hole will suck in everything that comes too close (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...).

That doesn't mean the larger topic isn't important. Most probably it is very important, far more than the more specific topic is. That's not what HN is optimizing for, though (see https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...). Trying to stay focused on the specific rather than the generic, and especially the inflammatory generic, is a big part of keeping HN intact for its particular purpose. Otherwise it would quickly become purely a current affairs site, which it's not.

>>dang+(OP)
Dang I'm pretty disappointed by this comment and the fact that you flagged the parent comment. I agree "Thanks Apple!" doesn't add anything to the comment, but the rest of the comment (while touching on a divisive issue) is an important consideration for female tech workers (and male tech workers with wives/daughters/etc). Losing the right to bodily autonomy is just as important to consider as potential tradeoffs regarding taxes. Yes, abortion restrictions are a contentious issue, but thats because they have material impacts on women's lives. I understand you dont want a flamewar but it seems wrong to dismiss comments raising legitimate concerns rather than inappropriate or flame-prone comments made in response.

>>human_+1p
This is one of the most prominent ideological faultlines that exists. There can't be many HN readers who are unaware of where their interests lie on this question—most likely there are zero. So I don't buy the public interest argument here; I think this thread is just the usual ideological/political foofarah, and on that the HN standard is clear: it's not what this site is for. If people really wanted to factually inform one another in a helpful way, they would post entirely different comments from >>39020465 . As I already said, it's not a borderline call.

Here's another way of looking at it, in case helpful: we don't want anything predictable on HN. The rhetoric that people resort to when an issue like this comes up is fierce, repetitive, and predictable. That makes sense—if you're fighting for a cause you feel passionately about, repeating the same points as intensely as possible is what you do. But all of that is off topic on this site. There are plenty of other places to post that way.

Edit: I know how strong the temptation is to read something like this and think that the mods are taking the wrong position* on (in this case) abortion rights, and then get super mad about it. But I'm not saying anything about abortion rights (or California vs. Texas) in the slightest. I'm just trying to do the pedestrian moderation job I always do.

* https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

>>dang+xr
<>>39058763 >

Political oppression is unfortunately highly predictable. This doesn't make it unworthy of discussion.