[cheshire_cat]

By that logic links to the FT and the WaPo also couldn't be posted. Which I guess is a fair position to take, but seems too limiting to me.

[dminik]

What meaningful conversation can you have about an article you can read beyond the headline?

[dylan604]

Just because you don't have access doesn't mean that people with access should be disallowed from discussing it. It just means you can't really discuss the article, but that's never stopped anyone from commenting before

[rustystump]

Sadly, knowing most people, headline is rarely read past even when it isnt paywalled

[functionmouse]

> seems too limiting to me.

articles restricting most users from reading them seems too limiting

ban all sites with paywalls/login walls including Twitter, NYT, FT, Business Insider, literally all of them

[nosioptar]

For anyone who doesnt know: changing the x.com or twitter.com in a twitter link to xcancel.com usually works to view tweets without an account.

(If I remember right, some video links dont always work with xcancel.)

[airstrike]

WSJ and Bloomberg offer "gift links" that paid users can share. The latter is only good for 7 days IIRC, however.

[imglorp]

Seems pretty easy to have a bot automatically try to create an archive link and comment it.

[Forgeties79]

There are plenty of posts every day that don’t require you to get through a paywall - I personally just ignore them. I imagine there are only a handful of paywalled articles a week, and most of them end up having an archive link in the comments anyway

[incanus77]

Ok, anyone care to gather at a coffee shop so that we can discuss the print version?

[ssl-3]

You guys haven't been going to the meetings?

[apparent]

No, my horse broke down so I've been stuck at the farm.

[ssl-3]

No worries, comrade.

I've gone ahead and moved this week's meeting, which happens to be tonight, to your place.

We'll be there soon.

[davidwritesbugs]

You have a /horse/?! Well laadeedaa

[apparent]

It is funny how things that were completely ordinary 100 years ago are now considered luxury items. I suppose it's because they're used for leisure instead of as work horses/transportation, and because feeding/housing/mucking is now a burden for city/suburban dwellers.