Do you feel like controversial subjects on HN are allowing dissent?
If a post about climate change, death penalty, abortion, womens rights, vaccines, etc is posted?
Going with the first one, especially in context of google banning climate deniers recently. Do you see anyone from the climate denial crowd being allowed to comment?
In my experience you're not allowed to discuss denial. You will be called a climate denier or other unflattering names and them removed.
The approach to avoid flamewars is to ban dissent and not the attacks. If everyone agrees with each other, you don't get flame wars.
The obvious problem is that you also don't get discussion.
I'm not sure what 'climate [change] denial' means:
A. There is no measurable climate change.
B. The causes of the planet's climate change are cosmic, not human made.
C. Industrial activity is causing climate change, but it's unclear how to limit industrial activity without vast increases in poverty.
D. Industrial activity is causing climate change, but the extent of the negative consequences is unclear.
I'm pretty sure all these opinions are allowed, especially if backed by evidence. Though I would expect A. and to a lesser extent B. to require quite a bit more of a thick skin. There is plenty of readily available data that indicates climate change is already happening.
>I'm not sure what 'climate [change] denial' means:
I think climate denial is much simply defined than your well laid out levels.
>I'm pretty sure all these opinions are allowed, especially if backed by evidence. Though I would expect A. and to a lesser extent B. to require quite a bit more of a thick skin. There is plenty of readily available data that indicates climate change is already happening.
The thing is, go check out the daily climate change topics and you won't see any of those. Why is that?
AOC says we have about 10 years left until 'world is going to end'
Todays climate post has a DEADline clock of 7 years 281 days. Even sooner!
The reason you're not allowed to be a science denier is because you are literally trying to kill humanity.
There are plenty of vax-hesitant, anti-anti-anti-vax, and anti-vax comments in every HN thread on the topic. Most discussion in those threads is centered around those topics. If dissent weren't allowed, that wouldn't be true
>There are plenty of vax-hesitant, anti-anti-anti-vax, and anti-vax comments in every HN thread on the topic. Most discussion in those threads is centered around those topics. If dissent weren't allowed, that wouldn't be true
Vax is interesting. The hivemind here seems to be undecided on this one. I actually attribute this to a single thing, Fauci's lies. He has admitted to lying how many times now? He has been caught lying how many more times?
The cost of those lies has created this hesitancy.
Do you feel like controversial subjects on HN are allowing dissent?
If a post about climate change, death penalty, abortion, womens rights, vaccines, etc is posted?
Going with the first one, especially in context of google banning climate deniers recently. Do you see anyone from the climate denial crowd being allowed to comment?
In my experience you're not allowed to discuss denial. You will be called a climate denier or other unflattering names and them removed.
The approach to avoid flamewars is to ban dissent and not the attacks. If everyone agrees with each other, you don't get flame wars.
The obvious problem is that you also don't get discussion.