On: Persistent Myths in Feminist Scholarship

[branden]

Hence the flag button and editors.

[davidw → branden]

So, effectively, there is some sort of "what should be here" standard. It is not just "anything goes" as per the guideline.

This kind of article completely fails the "of more interest to hackers than other people" test, which I think is more relevant.

[sho → davidw]

"This kind of article completely fails the "of more interest to hackers than other people" test"

Au contraire, it's front page news at HN, and I don't see it enjoying such popularity at any other aggregator service. That does suggest it is, in fact, of more interest to hackers - or at least the HN variety - than other people.

[davidw → sho]

Just getting something on the front page does not signify that it's hacker news. This article got there, for instance, and was subsequently killed:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=693525

[sho → davidw]

From the welcome message:

"Stories on HN don't have to be about hacking, because good hackers aren't only interested in hacking, but they do have to be deeply interesting.

What does "deeply interesting" mean? It means stuff that teaches you about the world. A story about a robbery, for example, would probably not be deeply interesting. But if this robbery was a sign of some bigger, underlying trend, then perhaps it could be."

http://ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html

I thought that this submission fell into that category. If you don't agree, well, OK.

(edited to remove personal reference)

[branden → davidw]

I agree that this article straddles the line, but like you point out, it's a big fuzzy line. I think it's best to just flag and move on.