Instead, we (all) need to train ourselves to (a) leave provocations where we encounter them and (b) focus on the genuinely interesting things. Then we have a chance at contributing to a good, interesting forum.
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
On the other hand, if there's a mixture, then you/all of us should focus on what does gratify curiosity and leave the nasty bits and flamey bits where you find them. That takes some restraint, of course, which none of us is used to on the internet, but it's the way to have the forum we all actually want HN to be. Nobody wants scorched earth—that's the ultimate boring endstate. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
Either way, we should abstain from predictable provocations and tedious flamewars. They may feel intense and exciting for a while but they lead to a degraded and ultimately boring forum.
Most articles are a mixed bag: they (hopefully) contain things that can lead to interesting conversation, and they often also contain provocations that will lead to angry, repetitive arguments if amplified. We don't, for example, need yet another generic ideological flamewar. There's no curiosity in those.
Therefore, "it's in the article" is not by itself a good reason for bringing something into a thread here. If an article is burning in places, that does not mean that we should import the flames. Seed discussion with the least predictable, most curious aspects of an article, not the ones that point to hell.