[jimejim]

Yeah, you're a bit late to the crazy train when it comes to Adams. He's been an unrefined troll online for quite some time. He'll talk politics or other bullshit and then say it was all just a joke when he gets called on it.

I hope you don't also like Orson Scott Card...

[pklausler]

> I hope you don't also like Orson Scott Card...

Not really, and I already knew about that one.

(But if Neal Stephenson is crazy, I don't want to know about it.)

[wyager]

What has he done that's crazy? People here are calling him crazy for supporting trump, but that's just a reflection of the political distribution of the HN community. Has he done anything truly crazy?

[lintroller]

It continues the conversation started by Ellen Pao cutting off Project Include's connection with YC because of Peter Thiel donating money to Donald Trump. As Sam Altman said in his tweet: "YC is not going to fire someone for supporting a major party nominee".

I apologize for getting really political and I say that you are free to act however you see fit but voting for Hillary isn't exactly taking the high road and to act as if voting for Trump is some morally reprehensible evil while condoning her candidacy seems disingenuous.

[464192002d7fe1c]

Agreed.

I have conversations with a lot of people about politics, even though where I live it puts me sometimes into uncomfortable positions and I'm sure I've lost customers or other business opportunities due to it.

The people supporting clinton fall into two baskets (sorry, couldn't resist).

#1 are people who have reasons (sometimes good, sometimes bad) for supporting clinton. I can have very productive conversations with these people, and, intellectually honest ones.

#2 are the people that simply say that any support for trump whatsoever is tantamount to treason and betrayal (morally/personally or even one time, someone actually said it should be "illegal"). They rarely have any good reasons for supporting clinton and when it is, I generally find it to be an issue where they interpret position as indelible truth. EG: Clinton is better for LGBT people, if you support Trump, you hate LGBT people. Perhaps LGBT people, of which I am one, simply have different priorities? What if I believe trump will do a better job with the economy and I consider that more important than having legislation protecting who will bake a cake at my wedding? Many people I used to consider this friends take that position as a moral and personal treason.

I unfortunately have a lot less friends than a year ago.

[464192002d7fe1c]

Nothing, really.

Its just that he has the audacity to have a different opinion than others. And/or that he doesn't recognize how historic a clinton presidency would be and/or agree that trump is zomg dangerous.

He's also definitely very accomplished at trolling people who hate the fact that his opinion differs. See: clinton endorsement, see gary johnson endorsement, see this entire post [http://blog.dilbert.com/post/152117093416/how-to-insult-me-o...].

But, really, you shouldn't take my word for it. Read his original post about the shadowban and see if you think its conspiratorial in nature: http://blog.dilbert.com/post/151981022076/is-twitter-shadowb...

> I won’t jump the gun and assume something nefarious is happening. But I will say that IF it is happening, I would regard it as treason. If one political party can use the machinery of social networks to reduce free speech, that is an attack on American values at the deepest level.