[outis]

Honestly surprised at how many people are posting comments about this. You know you'll end up on some list, right? Maybe you think it's ok to debate this kind of measure now, but the line will keep moving. In three years you may have people scouring your internet history for past wrongthink to deny you that promotion, or to get rid of you. In five years, machine learning algorithms may take your comments as input for your Ethical Credit Score. Hacker News is not going to delete your comments if you come to regret them.

It's best not to think about these things at all. What can you do, anyway? Suppress your mind's wandering. Focus on that algorithm on that refactoring, someone needs to get that work done, and it's you. You need that promotion. You need to make a lot of money for the federal government, for the state of California, and for your landlord, and you better make enough that there is something left to save. You don't want to look back in ten years and realize your youth disappeared while you were sitting in front of a monitor, you're still unmarried, you don't own a house, and you haven't had an independent thought in a decade, right? At least you've got to have some money saved up, that's going to make it worth it. So put your head down and get back to coding.

[dang]

It's an abuse of this site to use HN primarily for ideological battle, which this account has been doing for a long time. Would you please stop?

We don't care about your ideology, but we do care about not letting a minority of users ruin this site for everyone else by turning it into a political tire fire—especially given what's happening on the rest of the internet, which people come here for refuge from. The rest of the comments in this thread are bad enough as it is.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[outis]

I will obey your decisions as a mod.

However, I disagree with the assertion that my comment was about ideology or politics. My comment was about the very concrete conditions of life of someone working in the tech industry in California, which is why I thought it may be of interest to the readers of HN.

The situation I mentioned is not about following this or that political faction. It is a threat to free discourse, to the ability to have an intellectual life, and to folks' actual livelihood. And it is certainly relevant to many people who visit this site or comment on this article.

The only connection to a particular political side was the work "against" in the first sentence. I regret that, and I have replaced it with "about". If, with that change, you feel that it is still possible to identify a particular political or ideological faction which is responsible for the danger I mentioned, that is not something I can control. I can only say that the boot may be on the other shoe someday, and I would still be speaking up against it.

As for the rule against using HN primarily for ideological battles, I was not aware of it, and I apologize. Would it be better if I started posting more technical comments as well?

Also, how does your interpretation of the rules affect users that use "throwaway" accounts? If a user makes a throwaway to talk about a controversial issue, that account may only have one post, meaning that 100% of its posts are controversial. Would that not prevent people from discussing controversial issues at all? Which, in the end, is the same as the advice I was offering.

[dang]

It seemed to me an ideological rant like countless others—but I don't read them so closely, for the same reason a competitive hot dog eater doesn't savor each morsel: far too much quantity.

Your account's history seems clearly to be that of a single-purpose political account, and we ban those. HN is for the gratification of intellectual curiosity, not the prosecution of political battles. Those two things are incompatible, so we have to be proactive about this.

Throwaway comments don't change the equation much. The test is this: if someone is using HN primarily for political battle, we ban them (https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...). If they're occasionally commenting on a political topic as part of a range of intellectually curious interests, that's ok. In practice, these are two different classes of user: one is here for flamewar while the other isn't. There are always exceptions, but it's relatively clear where the line is. We don't want users who are here for flamewar.

Most users who create throwaway accounts to post political comments are just doing it so they can flame without restriction. We ban those. Earnest throwaway accounts are quite a bit rarer.

[outis]

The guidelines say: "Please don't use Hacker News primarily for political or ideological battle. This destroys intellectual curiosity, so we ban accounts that do it."

"Throwaway accounts are ok for sensitive information, but please don't create them routinely. On HN, users should have an identity that others can relate to."

I honestly think there's a good chance your decision in this case goes against the spirit of the rules, dang.

[testfoobar]

Self censorship is a feature not a bug.

[remarkEon]

This reads like the summary of an episode of Black Mirror.

[lykr0n]

It does, and it's shocking and saddening that it's not unrealistic.

[arcticbull]

This reads to me as "don't say things that leave you on the wrong side of history" - a solid recommendation for life in general.

[leereeves]

You mean "on the wrong side of people who don't tolerate differences of opinion".

It's sad to see the left becoming so intolerant. In this very discussion we see people claiming that it's sexist to be against this law.

Personally, I think the law should treat all people equally, not single out groups for favorable treatment.

[arcticbull]

In an idealized world it should. In reality, people aren't all equal. The circumstances of birth, genetics, society, societal memory and much more contribute to a world that left alone is inherently unfair. I'm for putting a finger on the scales a little bit to even out the inequalities. Not completely! But to look after the worst off, to right past wrongs (and we've made many mistakes getting here) and to push for a world where each individual is able to rise to the level of their competence and positive qualities by looking after their shortcomings. To create a meritocratic system in spite of the inherent inequalities.

So we're clear, I'm in favor or wealth inequality, and income inequality, but only coupled with social mobility. I'm in favor of having wealth as a reward for your contributions. And for a 90% estate tax to make sure each generation starts off without major advantages. I'm for socialized medicine so the circumstances of your birth or random chance don't stop you from achieving your potential. I'm for creating a world where nobody feels they can't achieve some level of success because of societal norms and if that means temporarily creating 'mandatory' role models, that's fine too.

If the world were inherently fair, wouldn't you already expect corporate boards to represent the rest of the society at large? And yet they don't so someone or somethings' finger must already be on the scales. Unless of course you're telling me only old white men are capable of being board members, that is. So in the interest of fairness, we should push back. A little. See what happens. Then act accordingly.

See how this would fit with my worldview?

I have friends who are incredibly right-wing and absolutely disagree with me, often, and I very much enjoy engaging them in conversation. I don't think they're wrong, I just disagree.

I don't think you're sexist for disagreeing with this law. I agree with it. I have my rationalizations and justifications, and I'm interested in hearing yours, and as always, in debating.

[flukus]

Predicting the future is your solid life advice? Would you recommend a crystal ball, a ouija board or a magic 8 ball?

Should I only concern myself with the long term history or do I have to worry about regressions mixed in? A lot of people thought they were on the right side of history with gay rights in Leninist Russia, it didn't turn out well.

[arcticbull]

FWIW my 'wrong side of history' comment was meant facetiously, nobody can know what the right side of history is until long after. Though in your specific case, I'd say they were, hopefully their day will come.

[tuesdayrain]

This boils down to "don't be wrong" except far more subjective.