Hacker News Reader

Comment by tguvot | Hacker News Reader

per a couple of articles [0][1]

- only 28% percent of members voted

- virtual discussion for resolution prior to voting was cancelled

- didn't allow dissenting opinions published on list serve

- The association has recently expanded its membership and there are little qualifications to become a member. The association had been mostly made up of scholars, but now includes figures like activists and artists,

- if somebody reads actual resolution, it reads like fine collection of tiktok videos.

[0] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cde3eyzdr63o

[1] https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog-september-02-2025/#li...

View on HN

Very interesting that you’re mixing two sources: one partially reputable and one entirely unreliable for this news.

And then you don’t make a distinction of which claim comes from where. The first claim comes from BBC, all the rest come from the second source. And best part? actual source for this is just one member saying stuff.

Well the whole discussion is under an article by the source entirely unreliable for this news.

aljazeera is unreliable??

That "for this news" qualifier is important. I trust their reporting on most topics, but hating Israel is probably only thing that Muslim countries have in common and it will have an impact no matter how much they claim independence from Qatar government.

Still, I guess any source is better than Israel paid "There is no famine in Gaza" ads, that YouTube displays between investment scams.

Citation required

This seems to happen a lot from what I've seen. When I saw Al Jazeera I already knew it would be biased.

Do you know any unbiased source? Any of these: BBC, NY Time, WSJ, CNN, MSN, The Guardian, NewsMax, MSDN...

There is no such thing. Everything is biased. In fact I don't know why so many people have an expectation for such things as "unbiased", "independent" anything to even exist. It is a lucky anomaly if you come across one.

anyone wondering, here's the actual resolution (which is basically a list of links)

https://genocidescholars.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/IAGS...

it doesn't seem like something that people need to vote on, there's no weighing of evidence, it's on the level of a beginner Wikipedia page

You might be the only one who bothered to look at actual resolution

Reply on news.ycombinator.com