I (used to) have friends on FB who will unfriend anyone epxressing an opinion that they don't agree with (or "find offensive"). They end up in an echo chamber where they never hear an opinion they don't already agree with, and then get surprised when elections don't turn out the way they wanted. Weirdly, I'm still friends with some of them irl, and we can have civil discussions about the same topics in person, just not online.
Unpopular opinions on HN get downvoted to invisibility, but the author is still able to post other unpopular opinions. They'll probably also get downvoted, but sometimes they get supported.
Do they? In my experience (admittedly limited, a couple of years) things get a lot of downvotes almost always for how they say it, not what they say. Can anyone give counterexamples? A well-expressed comment worth reading but downvoted to invisibility?
Also, I've had climate-skeptic comments upvoted and culture-war comments downvoted in contradiction to the dominant narrative here, so it does seem to be post-by-post rather than site-wide chambering.
That doesn't seem better to me. :( You are right that sometimes counter-hive-mind comments get upvoted, though, if written just the right way. I hope this happens more often in the future.