[koube]

Why is this comment downvoted? Outside of internet forums which tend to be very free speech, parental controls would be incredibly popular, and companies that don't have tight content controls receive a lot of scrutiny. As the article notes, Facebook is already being criticized for not tightly enforcing minimum ages, and there was a popular article out just yesterday[0] about Instagram just showing things that are vaguely "risque".

If you ask someone on the street if Google and Facebook should have parental controls the answer would be unequivocally yes. This is the normie position the vast majority of the time. Are we able to engage with normie positions? Is it not genuinely concerning if we're unable to?

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38439280

[gjsman-1000]

I don’t even like the term “normie” because, honestly, that blinds us into a perspective that we are superior to the perspectives of most people; when there isn’t any actual guarantee of that superiority.

[koube]

Fair point, I can see where you're coming from and I'm aware of the origins of the word on 4chan. I use the term not with the intention of placing anyone above others, but denoting the difference between insular forum culture and every day people you see when you go outside.

In the political world this word has taken on a similar meaning for the difference between commentariat and every day people and that's the way I use it in conversation.

https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/towards-a-normie-politi...

https://www.slowboring.com/p/a-lot-of-the-best-political-mes...

[mulmen]

It’s downvoted because it’s the same tired think of the children argument. It’s a red herring. Age verification doesn’t protect children. Legislation protects incumbents.

Meta are experts at manipulating emotions. That’s exactly what the “think of the children” argument does.

[koube]

Normies would believe the opposite positions - it's fine to think of the children. Age verification does protect children. Legislation protects children. So you've restated the disagreement. When you describe opposing positions as manipulative, tired, red herrings, and then you downvote and move on, does this seem more like engagement or disengagement with normie politics? I say again - is it not concerning that this board is unable to engage with people once they step outside?

I don't think the moderators have any trust in hacker news' ability to engage with this topic either, since this post has been nuked from hacker news.

[mulmen]

I’m not here to engage in “normie politics”. Downvotes are for uninteresting comments. The disengagement is deliberate. The culture here is a feature, not a bug.

[koube]

Who is the "culture here" deciding what is a feature or bug? Downvoting for disagreement and disengagement are against the Hacker News guidelines[0] and these are enforced with moderation. (See this post being nuked from hacker news.) People come here for Hacker News with moderation and good faith discussion, if they wanted unmoderated user content, 4chan would be fine.

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html