[omginternets]

Any way you want to stretch it, HN is not pay-to-play.

I am not against commerce; I am against a pay-to-play internet.

[olah_1]

You can’t get around the fact that HN is pay to play too though. that is my point.

You aren’t paying a fraction of a cent to post comments, but you’re paying in other ways. You just prefer the business model of HN, but i find the fraction of a cent model to be more straightforward and clear.

[stjohnswarts]

You can't win this argument, hackernews isn't "pay to play". You are currently playing with it and you didn't pay even a microtransaction. Why do you keep saying it is pay to play? For whatever reason HN providers are doing it as a free service and you aren't paying anything.

[olah_1]

HN sells me as their audience to advertisers right?

Would you say that Youtube is “free” as well?

Many people would simply prefer a more transparent / straight forward business model and I don’t think they are wrong for having that preference.

[omginternets]

You either don't know what "pay to play" means, or you're being disingenuous.

[olah_1]

Have you heard the phrase “time is money”?

I would say that Youtube is pay to play as well. You’re just paying with your attention to their advertisers.

I don’t think this logic is misplaced. HN has the same business model as all “free” tech platforms, doesn’t it?