> well, except for the fact that it wasn't an individual woman
That's a big difference! As I said, we all need to take greater care about facts than that. Bringing in a classic flamewar topic, when it isn't strictly relevant, is like dropping a bomb in the thread. The site guidelines ask people particularly not to do that.
Generic flamewar topics are black holes that suck everything in, especially anything that drifts nearby. They need to be consciously resisted if we are not to rehearse the same flamewars over and over. Some people may want to do that, but it's off topic for Hacker News.
> It's directly relevant to the question under discussion
I don't agree. Perhaps it feels that way because "gender" plus "controversy", but the actual topic of this thread is distinct and remote from that. We need to make finer-grained, more precise distinctions, if we want to avoid a big fireball.
If you think the Damore discussion has been done to death, then fair enough, I can understand the moderation decision. As to whether it's irrelevant to the overall discussion, I can understand your viewpoint - the article was specifically about sexual harassment, not broader "gender sensitivity" issues.
I disagree, however, that it was a mischaracterization of, or irrelevant to, the specific comment I was responding to.
That's a big difference! As I said, we all need to take greater care about facts than that. Bringing in a classic flamewar topic, when it isn't strictly relevant, is like dropping a bomb in the thread. The site guidelines ask people particularly not to do that.
Generic flamewar topics are black holes that suck everything in, especially anything that drifts nearby. They need to be consciously resisted if we are not to rehearse the same flamewars over and over. Some people may want to do that, but it's off topic for Hacker News.
> It's directly relevant to the question under discussion
I don't agree. Perhaps it feels that way because "gender" plus "controversy", but the actual topic of this thread is distinct and remote from that. We need to make finer-grained, more precise distinctions, if we want to avoid a big fireball.