hntroll1332

Yes, just not the usual way. People with karma can flag things they don't like regardless of whether it's correct, factual, polite, etc, and there's no feedback mechanism to rein them in. When your post full of correct information is hidden from others, you can't tell who the culprits are. You can't demand that they say why they did what they did.

I think HN is best thought of as a machine for deepening the delusions of the left. Nothing they don't like will reach the front page, first of all, or if it does, it will be flagged. Whatever remains for consideration, in the comment section you are allowed to fiddle around with a few extraneous details about it, but you can't skewer the whole thing. You can't say it's fundamentally invalid. Nor can you question the source. If it's a science article from the Guardian, you can't link to ten false science predictions the Guardian made in the past and ask people not to post fake news; the Guardian is simply blessed. It is Official Information.

The leftists on HN can throw bricks at your head all day long. But if you pick up any of those bricks and start throwing them back, you'll be downvoted or even banned for being inflammatory.

OK, I think I agree with you... they don't do what they do primarily because of allegiance to a faction. They have good intentions. But I guess over time I've come around to the idea that thinking oneself so superior to others that one is justified in controlling what people can hear or say is actually a political position that people commonly take. "I'm so much smarter / better informed / moral / whatever than others that it's correct when I put my hands over somebody's eyes or ears or mouth." This is considered normal now. People don't feel ashamed about it.