zlacker

>>jseip+(OP)
The avoidance of controversial topics when talking together is one of those things we Europeans are typically not so good at. I know from many Europeans who like me lived in the US for a while that they had to learn the art of talking without touching controversial subjects. At first it seemed superficial but then I realised that it makes discussions that are not controversial but nevertheless important possible and I came to appreciate it every now and then.

Anyways, it would be nice if we in the settings could apply our own penalizing to subjects that we don't care about or that we find controversial instead of having others decide for us. But that would mean that submissions ranked differently for different users, of couse...

>>flexie+u4
Doesn't that sound like a very unhealthy national self censorship?

>>alan_c+T4
> Doesn't that sound like a very unhealthy national self censorship?

Fortunately, Hacker News is not a nation, and can censor all it likes to keep out all the crap.

>>davidw+h6
The post I was replying to was about US citizens, not HN.

BTW, who are you to say what is crap and what is not? I mean, I may consider your reply to be crap.

>>alan_c+mm
> who are you to say what is crap and what is not

Someone who has seen lots of good forums wrecked by political bullshit. And to be perfectly clear, I do not mean "politics that I happen to disagree with", but politics, in general.

>>davidw+so
Politics seems to elicit a substantial amount of unwanted behavior from people who otherwise would behave normally.

I like forums that remove it as much as possible.