That example doesn't seem to support your point.
211 upvote with only 54 comments seems like a thread with a very high votes-to-comments ratio as well as a high absolute number of upvotes, so I would expect the algorithm to rate it highly.
Perhaps, enough readers looking at the thread and enjoying the article or the discussion would leave an upvote, even if they don't leave a comment. However, in the "squabbly" threads, commenters seem to overrun upvoters, and quickly at that.
I've seen some where someone was creating new HN accounts to circumvent HN's comment rate-limiting, due to wanting to respond on so many sub-threads. It's difficult to imagine that kind of fervor resulting in thoughtful discourse or even conforming to HN's guideline regarding being more substantive when more divisive. As such, a high comment-count velocity would be a good "negative" measure, but, absent that, just comment count is a good enough heuristic.
> If you filter that out, I might as well just go to my feedly.
Personally, I don't think I'd use it as an exclusive filter, but, perhaps, as a next step after the HN front page (but before the HN page 2).
Literally the first comment is complaining how it's lacking:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17997400
In the OP's link, the vaccine article appears above this post by a wide margin. It shouldn't.
That can be viewed as a very good thing, considering the word "vaccine" can be a lightning-rod fod flamewars, even on HN.
> isn't really about "hacking"
It's about science and how it's funded, which is routinely a topic of interest here, and is well within the guidelines: "That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity."
> In the OP's link, the vaccine article appears above this post by a wide margin. It shouldn't.
Ah, but I disagree. The discussion in this thread is very "meta" and could easily be characterized as annoying, even though I don't (yet) personally find it to be.
IMO, high upvote count without comments is a smell. Something is probably a little off.
As the author of https://hnprofile.com - I've spent a long time analyzing this...
For example, you post something about PostgreSQL on HN it'll have a ton of discussion. That's not just because there is squabbling, it's because people are interested. Often it is a disagreement, but it could be providing additional context. Take this comment thread on PostgeSQL 11:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17962821
The comments are significantly more interesting and helpful than the article (not that the article is bad, just the collective knowledge of HN provides more value). I often upvote items because I think they are interesting, but I comment asking questions, adding context, or providing feedback. That's the value of hacker news, IMO.
If you filter that out, I might as well just go to my feedly.
Edit: Prior discussion about hnprofile: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17942981