But the claim was "No discussion of this sort shall be allowed on hn", and his data shows that significant discussion is happening. Mass flagging doesn't change this.
That is despite violating HN's "intellectual curiosity" rule.
That is despite violating HN's "intellectual curiosity" rule.
It literally does. The majority of posters won’t ever see flagged posts.
They're clearly HN relevant, given that they relate to a tech titan effecting drastic changes in government structure, with significant security and other, by technical rather than legal means. Systematic flagging of posts about the activites of the Biden administration would have been equally questionable.
We don't know what others know—that would require being a mind-reader—and it's against the site guidelines to be aggressive about it.
Your comment would have been just fine if it started at the "Many posts are being [etc.]"
My original comment expressed skepticism about the idea that an expressive remark should be interpreted as a formal assertion of fact. I think your efforts at semantic policing are misplaced.
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...