That way the reader can decide for themselves. I'm less inclined to object to hasty responses to discussion points than I am to top level comments, but that's just personal choice.
It’s an order from the top. A commandment. A clear requirement. A statement of belief for the masses to follow.
It’s an unequivocal statement, a perfectly confident directive telling you precisely what to do without the slightest equivocation.
It’s not “read this powerful headline but then please read the in depth article only to find we don’t actually mean what is said in the headline, we mean something more nuanced and subtle why did you take our headline seriously?”
Amazing bit of self-justification you have there.
If you want to argue against what the author wrote, by all means. If you intend to argue against a straw man you have concocted out of a three word title, then you will seem a fool.
Maybe read it before commenting next time.
I wish HN had a feature where it could detect that you clicked the link and disallowed commenting before that. At the very least you’d have to click the link, even if you just immediately click back without reading, and you’d know what you were doing was circumventing the spirit of the place.