> those leaders essentially committed mass-murder from a distance
are you condoning drone strikes? (serious question). i believe people (including elected bourgeois leaders) should be held accountable. the US govt. are accusing Snowden and Assange of being "high-tech terrorists" (Biden [1]), so why cannot i refer to these people as murderers?
> US propertied class
this is merely a fact. the people in power are predominantly those who own property or intellectual property. a lot of people do not own their homes and have to rent, neither do they own IP so they have to work for their money (receive a wage). i am referring to these power structures based on my own beliefs ("be ruthless to systems, be kind to people").
> US propertied class' illegitimate 'war on terror'
at this point i'm pretty sure not many are claiming it is was a legitimate war... are you?
was the flagging because of something else? if yes, please share.
it just feels dishonest to censor stuff you don't personally agree with, especially since it received a bunch of upvotes. a 'don't make it political' stance seems naive to me because of course no system is (or ever can be) neutral, since there always many voices at the table.
i don't think it's fun to write this, i just want to call you out on what i perceive are a few double standards you have. i appreciate the moderation and the space to discuss the role of tech in society, and it just surprises me when things get censored or the host party decides to interfere (especially a comment that isn't downvoted to hell or actively harmful to someone (or misogynistic, racist, homophobic or transphobic)). until we have a more distributed web a la ActivityPub, SSB, DAT, IPFS, holochain etc., we all have to make the most of this centralized tech.
Mods didn't flag it or even see it until now. Users flagged it. We can only guess why users flag things, but in this case I'd say the comment was a direct step further into flamewar, so the flags were justified.
A comment that begins "wow so you're essentially [doing completely indefensible $thing]" and ends "serious question: how do you justify this in your mind?" is not the kind of discussion we want on HN. It at least broke these guidelines:
"Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine."
"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."
"Eschew flamebait. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents."
It also crosses into personal attack.
I'm sure you can make your substantive points thoughtfully and respectfully, so could you please do that instead? I don't have any problem with your views (I don't know what they are actually), but we need users to abide by the site guidelines. It's not as if every other commenter in the thread was doing a great job of it either but, as I said already, your comment was a noticeable step further into flamewar hell.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29039983
if it's:
> those leaders essentially committed mass-murder from a distance
are you condoning drone strikes? (serious question). i believe people (including elected bourgeois leaders) should be held accountable. the US govt. are accusing Snowden and Assange of being "high-tech terrorists" (Biden [1]), so why cannot i refer to these people as murderers?
> US propertied class
this is merely a fact. the people in power are predominantly those who own property or intellectual property. a lot of people do not own their homes and have to rent, neither do they own IP so they have to work for their money (receive a wage). i am referring to these power structures based on my own beliefs ("be ruthless to systems, be kind to people").
> US propertied class' illegitimate 'war on terror'
at this point i'm pretty sure not many are claiming it is was a legitimate war... are you?
was the flagging because of something else? if yes, please share.
it just feels dishonest to censor stuff you don't personally agree with, especially since it received a bunch of upvotes. a 'don't make it political' stance seems naive to me because of course no system is (or ever can be) neutral, since there always many voices at the table.
i don't think it's fun to write this, i just want to call you out on what i perceive are a few double standards you have. i appreciate the moderation and the space to discuss the role of tech in society, and it just surprises me when things get censored or the host party decides to interfere (especially a comment that isn't downvoted to hell or actively harmful to someone (or misogynistic, racist, homophobic or transphobic)). until we have a more distributed web a la ActivityPub, SSB, DAT, IPFS, holochain etc., we all have to make the most of this centralized tech.
anyways, please could you restore my comment?
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/dec/19/assange-high-t...