[hnbad]

HN is decidedly not "for anyone". It's an outgrowth of US tech VC culture and it has significant biases inherited from that (specifically a tech (right-)libertarian political leaning and an overrepresentation of white and Asian men from wealthy backgrounds).

It's literally the Paradox of Tolerance at play. Contrast Twitter with its "free speech alternatives" and then consider that Twitter is actually historically intentionally hands-off when it comes to content moderation.

I agree that an "HN for women" likely wouldn't solve any of these problems as by that description alone it sounds like the "girlboss feminism" equivalent and would likely inherit many of its problems. But I would also argue that if you try to distill the problematic aspects out of HN it ceases to be HN and you should really just ask about more inclusive tech news communities rather than a pinker version of the orange site.

[gspetr]

Twitter is hands-off when it comes to content moderation? What?

Not even people on Twitter believe that, according to a poll that Elon Musk ran.

[warrenm]

>specifically a tech (right-)libertarian political leaning

What part of HN have I missed over the last ~decade and a half?

I could be with you on the "libertarian" aspect ... but "right-libertarian leaning"

No way - this site leans notably left (albeit often with a libertarian twist)

[hnbad]

You're conflating "right" with "far-right". American libertarianism is moderately right-wing. Left-wing libertarians are anarchists, not against "rules" but against power hierarchies (freedom from oppression). Right-wing "libertarians" are laissez-faire capitalists (freedom from interference).

I realize that the prevalence of religious fundamentalist opinions in US politics skews the perception of what "left" and "right" mean but NOT being a theocrat or NOT actively wanting a white ethnostate doesn't make anyone "left-wing".

[taskforcegemini]

what aspects of hn are problematic?