[TechBro8615]

I flagged it because it's exhausting sociopolitical drivel that has nothing to do with tech. If the company discriminated against this person, then prove it in court. Nobody here has sufficient information to make a determination one way or another. And none of us has an obligation to take the author at their word.

[frob]

I don't care how many downvotes I get. An article about discrimination against marginalized groups in tech was flagged by "TechBro8615" because he is sick of "sociopolitical drivel." You can't make this shit up.

This is Hacker News distilled into a single article. If someone pitched this to The Onion, they'd throw it back as being too on-the-nose.

Thanks for reminding me that Tech Bros still do exist. I don't miss them.

[raxxorraxor]

The accusation of tech bro is basically the same as the accusation of being a nerd. Maybe even far more unsubstantiated.

I think this is a media term for people they for some reason or another just don't like very much. That is fine, but the accusation doesn't really carry any meaning.

[AlbertCory]

I agree 100% with your characterization of the post.

However, I don't agree that flagging it is justified. It's substituting your judgment for that of the 220 people who upvoted it. Unless you're the moderator, that's not your call to make.

[TechBro8615]

Flagging is a privilege you get with 500 karma. By definition it's my call to make, or else there wouldn't be a "flag" button available to me. However, note that moderators can silently ignore flags from certain users. For example I'm pretty sure my own flags have no impact. Whereas soon after I reached 500 karma, one flag from me was enough to set a post to flagged, but at some point my flags stopped making a difference. I'm guessing that if you flag too many "false alarms" then the moderators just turn your flag button into a no-op.

[sangnoir]

The purpose of flagging is to indicate that a story does not belong on HN. Frivolous flagging—e.g. flagging a story that's clearly on-topic by the site guidelines just because one personally dislikes it—eventually gets an account's flagging privileges taken away.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12173836

[loeg]

GP is arguing that it does not belong on HN.

[sangnoir]

I'm arguing GP personally dislikes the story despite its merits - it very clearly is related to tech - even though it doesn't need to[0]. Evidently, GP is wrong about it belonging to HN. Flagging a link that doesn't break HN guidelines, only because it offends your sensibilities is abusing flagging rights, IMO.

0. HN links only have to be interesting, to belong. They don't have to be tech-related, despite this being a widely-held belief.

[loeg]

GP claims it is not interesting:

> exhausting sociopolitical drivel

[sangnoir]

>> exhausting sociopolitical drivel

That quote would be exhibit A for antipathy, rather than "uninteresting"

[TechBro8615]

No, I do mean to say it's uninteresting, because I can predict all the replies. Without any factual basis for discussion, it will inevitably devolve into a predictable - and thus uninteresting - argument rooted in opposing idealogical positions of a culture war.

[cbtacy]

That's it. I'm done.

Been a Hacker News user since this launched, but have been feeling increasingly like I'm not part of this culture and don't want to be part of this culture anymore. So I'm out.

It's sad and kind of tragic to see what was once a thriving, diverse community that embraced all types of marginalized people (nerds, engineers, geeks, and so on) become a cesspool of bigotry and hate speech.

And the real tragedy, of course, is that Hacker News is just a microcosm of the developer culture -- which has become disgusting and hateful.

I hope those of you who are not bigots manage to fix this place. I hope the developer culture becomes healthier and less toxic. But I'm not going to be around to help or see it. Y'all are too exhausting and depressing.

Peace out.

[TechBro8615]

Embracing marginalized people doesn't mean automatically taking the side of the accuser in an employment discrimination case, based on a one-sided blog post with no factual evidence presented. That's just mob politics, and I'm perfectly within my rights to flag the post, just like I'm within my rights to explain why I flagged it when someone asks.

It's ironic that you labeled my comment hate speech and essentially called me a bigot, despite knowing nothing about me aside from my username.

[amatecha]

If you don't like it, don't read it. It's on-topic and worth discussing -- maybe not for you, but this story is absolutely not within the criteria of flagging, which is why despite people flagging it, the link remains and will continue to be present on the site.

[TechBro8615]

It's not really on topic. It's a personal grievance of the variety that anyone might have at their job. There's nothing about it that satisfies intellectual curiosity, and as demonstrated by the comments here, it's a topic likely to devolve into a flamewar. This shouldn't be surprising since it's impossible to make any argument from a logical basis. There is simply not enough information available from this one-sided blog post to have a meaningful discussion about it that isn't unfair to one side or the other.