I flagged it because it looks and quacks like propaganda and has little to do with tech. Perhaps Seymour Hersh is another once-reputable journalist who has unfortunately succumbed to anti-West brain-rot like Glenn Greenwald.

I am also worried that HN's moderation has a bus factor of one, and has effectively no recourse. That's a lot of community-shaping power in one person's hands, regardless of how good of a job dang normally does.

The parent's first question is still pertinent.

> You question people's motivation when it comes to submissions. Why not when it comes to flagging?

If you can't trust the community's input when it comes to flagging, then why bother pretending you have a community at all?

If you can't trust the community's input when it comes to submissions, then why bother pretending you have a community at all?

To me either negation is about the same but not a deal breaker because I can exercise reasonable judgement.

> Perhaps Seymour Hersh is another once-reputable journalist who has unfortunately succumbed to anti-West brain-rot like Glenn Greenwald.

Well that explains why you're so against this type of article. You should reconsider whether the rot you're perceiving isn't in the West, rather than in Greenwald's brain.

I have already considered it carefully, thanks. Same to you.

> what's surprising to me here is the reaction to dang's reasonable justification for disabling the flags on this story

It doesn't seem so reasonable. It seems bizarre, frankly. It's utterly out of line with (what I percieve to be) the whole history of HN moderation on this kind of subject.