For the same reason any other submissions concerning political philosophy, economics, etc. are.
Quite many of those "off-topic" submissions climbed up to the top; probably because people here were interested enough in them. :)
If anyone is interested, and have any questions regarding the topic, feel free to ask! I am sure many people would love to join and be of help as well.
There are really many others, how is this one any different?
> ideological flamebait
It is not. There are many other submissions similar to this one with actual, rational debates happening without it being devolved to an "ideological flamewar". You appear to be biased, and you seem to assume that HN members are not capable of rational debates regarding political philosophy, and economics. Evidently, this is not the case.
> Generic ideological tangents, and generic discussion generally, is off topic on HN
Yet still submitted quite often, and is followed by fruitful conversations, without any flamewar.
I can't help but wonder: what is the objective measure for generic vs non generic ideological tangents? What is the objective measure/classification for what is signal and what is noise? Stuff that person agrees with vs not? Their use of superfluous language vs the message being delivered? You are clearly trying to be clever but it really is meaningless, and the irony being that obviously, the signal to noise ratio of your message, will be very bad indeed, considering your message basically can be summed up as "I disagree with this and want it censored", which of course, in the greater context of the thread, is just noise as it contributes nothing.
4 comments
[ 3.5 ms ] story [ 17.6 ms ] threadQuite many of those "off-topic" submissions climbed up to the top; probably because people here were interested enough in them. :)
If anyone is interested, and have any questions regarding the topic, feel free to ask! I am sure many people would love to join and be of help as well.
Generic ideological tangents, and generic discussion generally, is off topic on HN. Its signal/noise ratio is too low.
Just an example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15440978 (has 141 points, 144 comments, no one complained)
There are really many others, how is this one any different?
> ideological flamebait
It is not. There are many other submissions similar to this one with actual, rational debates happening without it being devolved to an "ideological flamewar". You appear to be biased, and you seem to assume that HN members are not capable of rational debates regarding political philosophy, and economics. Evidently, this is not the case.
> Generic ideological tangents, and generic discussion generally, is off topic on HN
Yet still submitted quite often, and is followed by fruitful conversations, without any flamewar.
I can't help but wonder: what is the objective measure for generic vs non generic ideological tangents? What is the objective measure/classification for what is signal and what is noise? Stuff that person agrees with vs not? Their use of superfluous language vs the message being delivered? You are clearly trying to be clever but it really is meaningless, and the irony being that obviously, the signal to noise ratio of your message, will be very bad indeed, considering your message basically can be summed up as "I disagree with this and want it censored", which of course, in the greater context of the thread, is just noise as it contributes nothing.