[Kalium]

You are free to think in whatever prehistoric mode you wish. That's fine. I simply desire to not be coerced into thinking like you. I should be free to choose to think like you or not as I see fit.

In this context, what I really mean is that a space should not be controlled entirely by the people who just happen to be there at the moment. Every space has a past. Every space has a future. The past and the future are always different from the present. That's as it should be. People who think in terms of "I control this space now, so all things should be about me" are thinking in a prehistoric mode I find distasteful.

[TeMPOraL]

I don't like the approach you're proposing. The ability of people to share the space around them seems like the most basic of the "rights" you could have. "[A] space should not be controlled entirely by the people who just happen to be there at the moment" feels to close to encouraging uninvited and unwanted guests to take over communities and reshape them.

Like, imagine if suddenly the fishing community decided to come en masse to HN and start talking and upvoting only fishing-related stories, while downvoting / flagging everything else. I think the present HN community should have the (moral) right to tell them to go and find their own spot, instead of taking over someone else's.

[Kalium]

I'm saying that new blood and new thoughts and new ideas should always be encouraged in any community, space, or location. Particularly when resources like physical space are very much finite. I think that any desire to freeze a community, space, or location in amber is unhealthy. Those with an interest in the future of a community, space, or location will not be identical to those who happen to be there at the moment or those who were there yesterday.

For an example, look at what that desire has done to the housing market of San Francisco.

[porFavor]

your line of reasoning is becoming very tangled.