Saying, "I don't want to see this on HN" when it clearly fits the criteria for submission and aids in making the audience of HN more aware[1] does suggest that you are ignoring these sorts of issues elsewhere in your life.

[1] Though this post wasn't particularly informative, it did stir debate.

"Stirring debate" is nowhere to be found in the criteria for submission.

The following sounds a bit rude, but mostly I just like the sound of it, and I'm writing it with a smile, rather than actually being worked up.

You know two things about my life and political involvement outside of HN: jack, and shit:-)

Debate raises awareness and challenges opinions. It's not related to the criteria, but it is related to why you would be inclined to discuss this on HN if you were inclined to discuss it outside of HN.

I don't need to know anything about your political involvement to draw conclusions about your involvement on this particular cause.

Edit for clarity:

When I mentioned the criteria, I wasn't referring to debate; I was referring to awareness.

HN is not a vehicle for "political awareness", either.

> I don't need to know anything about your political involvement to draw conclusions about your involvement on this particular cause.

No, you just jump to conclusions because I don't like to see politics on HN?

These politics fit the criteria for HN, so I draw conclusions about your political opinions, yes.

I can see how tempting that would be, but David is a special case. With his many years of complaining about politics on HN he has covered the entire ideological spectrum. :)

Edit: I mean that to sound good-humored, not snarky. I agree with davidw on this more than I used to.

It's difficult to reply to this because there are lots of moving, intertwining parts. I'll label them, I guess

  1) I didn't assume political apathy, but I did assume apathy about this particular case.
  2) His responses suggested that he was somewhat concerned with politics outside of HN.
  3) My use of "these sorts of issues" did suggest that I meant politics in general, but I meant *this* brand.
  4) I did not suggest that HN was a vehicle for political awareness in general, but rather than this brand of politics is well-placed on HN.
  5) I also suggested that this particular brand of politics do belong on HN given its criteria.

I realize this isn't my best writing, but I'm running on very little sleep and I don't have the energy for the dozen proofreadings and rewordings that I normally give my posts. I hope that my meaning can be accurately discerned.