There are currently three New York Times articles on the front page of HN. None of them are particularly interesting or well-written. I really don’t see why this is necessary.
How are they all to be seen as not well written? Too many comma splices?
Are they factually accurate and you don’t agree with the tone?
Are they factually incorrect and you like the tone?
“Knee jerk hot take” is pretty unnecessary.
It makes it to the front page because people vote it up. This makes it de facto on-topic.
I think this is good, FWIW. I just don't think it's useful to argue that it shouldn't be removed just because it's upvoted because that's clearly not how HN is run.
afaict, HN mods generally remove submissions because their comments are a dumpster fire. Though I haven't witnessed it in a while. The last dumpster fire comment section I saw, dang just stickied his comment to try to encourage people to get back on the topic of the article and avoid the obvious knee-jerk response to it.
Such high quality discourse