I think it would quickly devolve into 4Chan. Almost all of the current community would decamp, and the trolls that infest other sites would take over.
HN has one homepage; one sub-community. Reddit has an infinite number of subreddits. Similar for facebook.
Even with no moderation, in no case would anyone be exposed to content that wasn't posted and allowed in a community that they deliberately subscribed to.
Reddit polices what kinds of communities are allowed. HN is one kind of community.
Likewise, Reddit and Facebook both have to deal with being judged by all the forums they "host." You may not think it makes sense to criticize Reddit as a whole for hosting white supremacist forums and violent misogyny forums, but the rest of society seems to think that one bad apple forum spoils the entire Reddit and Facebook barrel.
If you're looking for a comparison, I don't have to read any thread I don't want to on HN, just as I don't have to join any subreddit I don't want to on Reddit.
But I know they're there, and that affects my perception of what HN or Reddit or Facebook is.
If it was just about hiding content, we could argue that HN shouldn't censor anything, but if we let people tag threads and comments with labels like "white supremacy" or "SJW raving," then everyone can filter what they don't want to see, so what's the problem?
Brigading has been rightly against the rules of Reddit forever, that's a hostile action, rare, quickly punished and not significant.
Also, critically, it applies the same way to completely separate websites as well. Redditors could brigade HN or vice versa.
On Reddit, nobody gets exposed to content they didn't subscribe to.
>I don't have to read any thread I don't want to on HN
True, though you still have to see it, so in the interests of time at the least it's good to have a filter.
>we could argue that HN shouldn't censor anything, but if we let people tag threads and comments with labels like "white supremacy" or "SJW raving," then everyone can filter what they don't want to see, so what's the problem?
That's a great idea! We could do a curator system where anyone can sign up to be a curator to tag things with their own personal tags. Then you can just find a curator who matches your wishes and we're golden.
Not in this or any other timeline. Even if we cover up the shops, knowing that your money in a normal store helps the mall stay in business to rent space to a racist store makes this mall anathema to a huge segment of society.
—-
YOU may be comfortable shopping there, and YOU might construct all sorts of rationalizations for being complicit in racism, but YOU are being unrealistic if you think that everybody else is going to be all, “racism is terrible, but hey, it’s a mall, what’s the big deal?”
Not everybody is going to go along with rationalizing away being complicit in violent racist ideologies. And thus it is that companies like Facebook and Reddit end up being judged by the worst things they support.
If you think that’s terrible and want to trot out “logic” that “proves” they aren’t complicit in racism, you’re going to have to accept that plenty of people can’t be persuaded to do nothing while their country slips into Nazis II.
HN is entirely filled with right-wing to far-right sheltered techbros. Half the accounts here that are constantly complaining about "free speech" and "consequences to their actions" are really one bad day away from calling everyone they disagree with various slurs, and the other half are so insulated from any sort of actual injustice in the world that they sit atop of their smug towers of indifference, cawing at the peasants below who have things such as "opinions" (that disagree with theirs, of course) or "motivations".
What makes something valuable is the 10% of the thing that is not CRUD, and whatever measures put into place to make sure that the 90% CRUD doesn't poison the 10% that's worthwhile.
To me, that's having clear guidelines that are consistently applied through moderation.