This thread would disagree: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25015967

The presence of that thread disagrees with which point?

Please re-read this sub-thread.

"Off-Topic: Most stories about politics"

Note, most. Not all. Big stories such as these are, I'd say, on-topic.

Yes.

Who's arguing with you?

You are. We can see this earlier in the thread.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41026902

You made a blanket statement that wasn't reflective of the HN guidelines.

That nuance was lost on you then. And my nuance about general politics was lost on you, also. Existence of exceptions is implied in my comment.

Still, nobody (at least not me) was arguing with you.

I'm not sure what you're expecting from this discussion?

I can't mindread your assumptions for a loaded question.

Ah, we have something in common, then.

I never asked a loaded question.

Your comment doesn't follow at all.

You've now had multiple people respond to you about your post, all trying (in vain, it seems) to help you understand where the initial confusion occurred, and you continue to either willfully misunderstand, or maybe it's some ESL thing? Or maybe you're just a bored troll? I don't know. Either way, not going to continue responding.

Stop acting in bad faith.

Other commenters replied to the same parent, challenging their claim.

“Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, or celebrities, *unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon*”

Emphasis mine. This is not a “general politics” story and almost certainly qualifies as an “interesting new phenomenon”.

Are you being daft? You arrogantly told someone to “read the policy”, presuming they haven’t. And you stated that general politics are not allowed under the submissions policy. I’m pointing out that this is far from general. I think I’ve been quite clear.

You didn't answer my question.

>And you stated that general politics are not allowed under the submissions policy.

It's what the policy says. There's on-topic and off-topic with exceptions. Blanket statements about what "good hackers find interesting" is a partial representation of the policy.

> I’m pointing out that this is far from general.

Going back to you NOT answering my question, I'm not saying this is "general" either.

Obviously, you didn't read the whole thread.

You?

Generally discussion works best around here when each participant only has to explain their own points. If people have to explain your own points to you it makes discussion kind of hard.

And making points for someone else that they didn't make is also not productive for "discussion work[ing] best."

Explaining that the HN Guidelines has off-topic railings (with exceptions) too isn't saying that a tweet about POTUS resigning isn't a valid exception.

I guess people are on tilt because of the announcement.