> Taking HN threads further into flamewar is also not ok.

I mean, where's the warning for insubstantial, ideological flamebait in the first place for the top post, dang? And the climate change post before that, and the one before that...

They post these things based on their gut reaction to the headline, and now the discussion in here is about the OP and not the subject at hand.

Devolving to personal attack is worse. Someone else posting misinformation is no excuse. If you have better information, you are responsible for presenting it in a way that doesn't take the discussion deeper into hell. Failing that responsibility discredits the truth, which makes things worse all around.

If you see a comment that you think we should have moderated but we didn't, the likeliest explanation is that we just didn't see it. We don't come close to seeing everything that gets posted here.

This discussion somehow became brigaded by AGW deniers and you could see a stark turn in moderation, where an absolutely ignorant (not an attack, an observation) root post sits shining high on the mount despite being just embarrassing.

It is incredible and sad that HN is yet another tool for deniers and anti-science charlatans. And if dang thinks that's a personal attack, feel free to delete my attack friend -- the value of this site when it hosts such a cancerous collection of knuckledraggers approaches zero.

The top post to a scientific report is an ignorant screed [not a personal attack -- literal, actual truth] lamenting how wrong everything is, attacking a journalist who did a completely fine job (classic denier playbook), how it has nothing to do with warming. When called upon it began grossly misrepresenting the study, etc.

This is the classic denier play book. Denier 101.

It sits high and mighty. It must be correct, right?

Congratulations, dang, you've moderated yourself a wonderful little AGW denier niche. All while we pretend that scientific reports are "political" lest we ruffle the feathers of idiots who want to imagine how things should be based upon their opinions.

You broke the site guidelines. Someone else breaking them, or posting a bad comment, doesn't make it ok for you to break them too.

If you know more and have better information than someone else, you actually have a greater responsibility; breaking the rules by ranting, doing flamewar, calling names and so on, discredits the greater truth you're in possession of. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

I realize that's far from easy when you're surrounded by lies and distortions, but it's work we're all asked to do here.