If only that were true. See another comment in this very thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42159992. This comment isn't breaking rules, it is simply someone attempting to argue his point of view. I think it's a foolish point of view, but that's his right and he is arguing it civilly enough. Yet he got flagged into oblivion and will almost certainly remain so - not because he broke the rules, but because he expressed a view which is unpopular.

I would like it to be the case that people only flag posts which they think violate the rules, but that unfortunately isn't so. People on this site (just as with other sites) treat moderator reporting as a "super fuck this guy" button quite frequently.

>I think it's a foolish point of view, but that's his right and he is arguing it civilly enough.

The bigger the claim the bigger the burden of justifying yourself. Like, I can't just stroll in and say "but Blacks being mentally inferior doesn't mean they're dumb" and leave it at that. There's been enough dogwhistles like that over the decades that that sort of driveby "well, maybe hating people is good" isn't worth entertaining without a signifigant amount of explanation.

This is the spirit of the rule behind:

>Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.

So there is something flag worthy if you're this deep into a conversation then simply say "but bigotry isn't inherently bad".

Now if you do all that: will you still get down-voted for you explanation, yes. You may or may not get flagged depending on the crowd. You probably won't be banned unless you're repeatedly obsesses with this topic to no effect.

P.S. you can (perhaps invisibly) lose your flagging priveledges if you abuse those as well. flagging is not simply disagreement. It is basically saying "@ dang this is a comment you need to check out". You are wasting resources by using it willy nilly.