There are currently three New York Times articles on the front page of HN. None of them are particularly interesting or well-written. I really don’t see why this is necessary.
I would be happy if the New York Times was banned from this site. An awful lot of low quality and off topic content from there seems to constantly make it to the front page here.
HN moderation frequently removes things that people upvote-- including some of the most upvoted subjects (they're upvoted a lot because they're divisive political stuff).
I think this is good, FWIW. I just don't think it's useful to argue that it shouldn't be removed just because it's upvoted because that's clearly not how HN is run.
That's a separate issue than what's happening in this thread: someone accusing upvoted content of being off-topic.
afaict, HN mods generally remove submissions because their comments are a dumpster fire. Though I haven't witnessed it in a while. The last dumpster fire comment section I saw, dang just stickied his comment to try to encourage people to get back on the topic of the article and avoid the obvious knee-jerk response to it.
