zlacker

I think the idea that people are being silenced from discussing the issue honestly is totally disingenuous. I see far more posts from people on HN about not being able to discuss the issue than I do posts actually trying to discuss the issue. I don't think I've ever seen people shut down for expressing reasonable if contentious opinions, yet somehow everyone has this idea that there can't be a reasonable discussion about it. Yes the discussion may be heated, and some more extreme viewpoints should justifiably be considered beyond the pale, but that doesn't explain the level of paranoia I see around here.

The effect of this is to reframe the debate from the actual issue at hand, into a debate about how we discuss it. The way we discuss it does matter, but the level of attention that gets around here feels like bikeshedding.

>>itsmen+(OP)
I know for a fact that I, and several other people, remove ourselves from all in-life discussion of this topic because of fear of economic and social repercussions.

Is that not "silencing" (your word) because you think we are irrational and everyone can discuss reasonable points of view without reprisal? Or is it not silencing because we choose to remove ourselves from the conversation?

>>itsmen+(OP)
You seem to be saying it's not a big problem on Hacker News. I would agree with that. Most people, including you and I, post pseudonymously here. Many people create throwaway accounts in order to post anything political. Furthermore, social justice people consider Hacker News to be the preeminent example of toxic-masculine tech.

>>itsmen+(OP)
I'm certainly a datapoint for feeling unable to speak about my opinions (n=1).