zlacker

> You're talking as if the guidelines that have been established for this site don't exist.

They are, perhaps intentionally, rather fluid and vague. I mean, if you wanted to argue about it, you could say that the problems with Zimbabwe are politics, and certainly aren't new: they've been covering that country's decline for years in The Economist, and if I recall, had one of their reporters kicked out of the country.

>>davidw+(OP)
Naturally, reasonable people will disagree. How many things are there that are interesting to everybody here? That some stuff seems uninteresting is a feature, not a bug; it's an aspect of the intellectual diversity that is the raison d'etre of the site.

Speaking of the guidelines, I don't think anyone pointed out the one that actually addresses the "off-topic police" explicitly:

Please don't submit comments complaining that a submission is inappropriate for the site.

>>gruseo+L
> How many things are there that are interesting to everybody here?

I know this one! Hacking and startups:-) My concern is not 'uninteresting' at all, but the slippery slope that reddit went down, where a trickle of genuinely interesting articles on politics and economics became a flood of crap.

>>davidw+41
Sigh. You've convinced me of one thing: these arguments are a pointless merry-go-round and I'm making things worse by adding to it.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go find some articles about Nietzsche's "eternal recurrence" to post here. :)