[aidanhs]

In the concrete context of the post you're replying to, you seem to be saying that women are 'vulnerable people'? I'd suggest picking a definition of 'vulnerable people' that doesn't mean pushing away half the world's population.

(I'm also a little bemused at your implication of what an 'uncomfortable idea' is, as well as the implication that hackernews is the right place for this, as well as the assertion that you can fragment social networks to satisfy people while ignoring the effects of critical mass - but there's too much to unpack)

Your second paragraph is irrelevant in this thread (which discusses HN specifically).

[incompatible]

Uncomfortable ideas, for vulnerable people, I guess would be the kinds of ideas that make them vulnerable in the first place. E.g., that same-sex relationships are against God or against the natural order of things, or that women should naturally be subservient to men, or only have themselves to blame for sexual violence. I've heard that there are forums on the Internet where such ideas are explored freely.

Edit: A forum that bans discussions like that, will probably be seen as left-leaning by some.

[sacrosancty]

That's just obscure political correctness. I'd say it's far more often people who lack emotional maturity or self confidence and have any of all sorts of common insecurities that they don't want to be reminded of. Imagine being called an idiot when you actually have a low IQ? It hurts and it's far more common than being gay in Pakistan or whatever.

[sacrosancty]

The person I was replying to seemed to want protected forums where women could be shielded from uncomfortable ideas. I was just saying that we already have those, as well as not those. Everyone's satisfied.

As for network effects, small forums still exist and serve people fine. You don't actually have to be on Twitter or HN to interact with people that you prefer.