mseebach: "You're writing that as if SOPA was one side of an argument where good people could reasonably be on either one side or the other, and HN and Google just happens to be on the same. But it's not, SOPA has a right and a wrong side. We're on the right side..."

parody: "My opinion is right because I say it is."

mseebach: "Google is on the right side and good people are either uninformed or on the right side."

parody: "Anyone who doesn't hold the same opinion is either bad, or needs educating."

mseebach: "It's not unreasonable to wish for Google to employ some of their considerable clout in evangelising the right side."

I was wrong. This part has value. The "right side" part of it is overreaching though. In my opinion.

Also, I didn't call him stupid, I called the downvoters stupid. I meant it in the way people usually do: I don't like it. The people who can downvote are supposed to be the pillars of our community. Yet they seem more interested in policing opinions than quality. More interested in SOPA than HN. Then they turn around and complain that it's all going to shit. Come on... lets promote the strongest arguments and promptly refute the lousy ones.

That's an opinion, one which I (and others) don't agree with.

SOPA is bad for Google, too. Why shouldn't they be involved? The fact of the matter is that corporations are involved in US politics. Like it or dislike it, it's a fact. Advising anti-SOPA corporations to stay out of the fight just feels like a case of misplaced principles. Suggesting that Google sit on the sidelines severely hampers efforts to get the word out and stir up anti-SOPA sentiment among people who may not understand the issue all that well, or may not be particularly interested yet.

I want SOPA to fail. If Google can help with that, I'm all for it, as long as they don't do anything shady or illegal while providing that help.