[lcnPylGDnU4H9OF]

Just some background: there is a controversy in the Ruby community[0][2] around the governance of the rubygems project. It has been maintained for a long time by employees of Ruby Central but not in a corporate capacity. There was a recent hostile takeover of this project by the Ruby Central corporate arm.

The most likely reason it was flagged from my perspective is that David Heinemeier Hansson (who created rails) is kind of the figurehead of this community and he has controversial opinions[1] which people believe make him unfit to represent their community. The controversy has manifested as people speaking out against DHH in his position. So this post seems to have been flagged for being "political" because it is seemingly in opposition to rubygems for the DHH reason.

0: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=pastMonth&page=0&prefix=fa...

1: https://davidcel.is/articles/rails-needs-new-governance (this article has a lot of examples from DHH's blog)

2: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45348390

[ilikepi]

Er...FYI, your [2] link is to a discussion about an article written by the person to whom you are responding.

Personally, I think the reason this post about gem.coop has been flagged is that we've reached the point at which new HN threads about things related to the recent RubyGems shake-up quickly devolve into people rehashing the DHH "aspect" of it all. So it has become less about flagging the actual target of the post and more about flagging the parts of the discussion that seem to go nowhere.

EDIT: expanded

[lcnPylGDnU4H9OF]

That's fair enough, I didn't actually notice. Regardless, I was offering the information for other readers, which may or may not include the person I'm replying to.

Edit:

> flagging the parts of the discussion that seem to go nowhere

This is and isn't what actually happens, though. People do flag the parts of the discussion that don't go anywhere but then people also flag the post itself because they think there's no reason to discuss it at all for the fact there's a vocal part (minority or majority doesn't really matter) that wants to discuss a topic that's not going anywhere.

People shouldn't flag the post itself just because it's likely to gather or even has gathered a crowd that will discuss such directionless topics when there are better topics to discuss, even (especially?) if they're not currently being discussed.

[belahon]

> 1: https://davidcel.is/articles/rails-needs-new-governance (this article has a lot of examples from DHH's blog)

Basically just a blog post from some guy aghast that DHH has different political opinions to him. I'm politically on the left too but I can't imagine getting so incensed about someone else having right-leaning views.

Do these people never leave the house to meet anyone outside their echo chamber? The mind boggles.