zlacker

I understand, could you please check it and report what you find?

But as I understand you, it's left to the moderator's discretion to unflag topics.

Is there a checklist / criteria of judging whether the users can have a "reflective" or "reflexive" political discussion?

Would 9/11 not be covered because it would be too "reflexive"?

Why was this discussion of this "genocide" viewed as not too "reflexive"?

You have to see how it looks very one-sided. It would be nice for political discussion topic allowance details to be explained.

Currently it leaves a lot of assumptions as you point out.

>>theult+(OP)
Ok, I checked and the only moderator intervention I found was that we prevented flags from killing >>37800508 . That's not the same thing as turning the flags off, but it prevented the story from being marked [flagged][dead] instead of [flagged].

> Would 9/11 not be covered because it would be too "reflexive"?

Probably? I'd prefer not to discuss counterfactuals because it's impossible to know.

I've explained at length on many occasions how we approach the question of which political topics to allow or turn off flags on - https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...

I know it's unsatisfying, but moderation of these things is never going to be (and certainly never going to feel) completely consistent. We try our best, but it's not possible, and especially not in hindsight, because moderation is guesswork.