And even if you disagree (perhaps you believe there was some form of Russian collusion, despite the Muller report) the accusations are certainly well within the bounds of mainstream debate. Nothing wild here.
You glanced at a Node dependency of the particular gripe once, so your skin in the game under these rules of mainstream debate is sufficient to dox you and threaten you and your family with death based on job title alone. Am I understanding your position correctly? If so, are you perhaps molding your definition of mainstream debate to suit your political beliefs?
Bold of you to dismiss that aspect so out of hand when you advertise your employer on HN, as if it couldn’t happen to you.
No? Nothing? Not a clue? That’s not ringing any bells whatsoever? I read someone else’s comment?
k.
Their "get the facts" link is not deceptive. Suggesting that it's a pretext of silencing Trumps viewpoints is a wild accusation.
This is subjective. “Wild” could mean out of the mainstream or false.
Vaccine effectiveness and the Earth being a sphere are within the bounds of mainstream debate. They contain sides that are wildly inaccurate.
Sometimes a mainstream debate levels wild accusations.