> This is a typical phenomenon when a topic is divisive, and the Israel/Gaza topic is one of the most divisive.

Kind of related thought - is there a topic you think is more divisive? And also, is there some way that this is measured officially or unofficially?

No and in fact my comment originally said "the current topic is perhaps the most divisive HN has ever seen".

Not measured, though, if you mean some kind of quantitative approach.

I wonder how that could be measured.

I also think it's the most divisive topic here (for the last few months at least), but since it's obviously very personal for me, it's hard to know if that's a bias in my view.

> I wonder how that could be measured.

Maybe posts with high Flag and Vouch counts?

I don't think this topic is divisive anymore. I used to be on the fence about the whole conflict despite growing up in a Muslim country and being fed propaganda. But nowadays I can't in any shape or form rationalize Israel 's actions.

Seeing as these discussions are always insta-flagged and you need to revive them to allow for discussion, have you considered adding 'Israel' and 'Palestine to a set of keywords you need to approve to be set as flagged instead of letting automation take over?

Having a human in the loop prevents bad-faith actors from abusing the system to suppress information and discussions.

I think we probably already see the most important ones, such as the one today. If there's an article that particularly deserves having the flags turned off, people can always bring it to our attention at [email protected].

That's kind of a paradox. If people instaflag it, then the chance I will see it is very low unless I'm the submitter.

That's true, but I thought you were asking if we would create a list for us mods to review.

The article makes some hard to digest claims, for example:

> According to six Israeli intelligence officers

Not 1 reservist, or 2 retired officers, or 3 contractors, but 6 active serviceman - whose day to day job is to figure out how to hide secrets.

There are more statistically impossible statements.