But the moderation is part of what keeps it a fairly enjoyable experience still IMO.

That's irrelevant to my comment. However, I don't think you have any evidence to support your assumption.

As I expected: downvoted for pointing out the truth. HN is terrible.

> By extension of holding Pao responsible for all actions taken under her charge, I declare PG to be sociopathic, if not outright evil.

You don't think the downvotes are for this hyperbolic insult?

As a long time enthusiast of HN, and not a total shithead based on karma, I don't think there was anything hyperbolic in the original comment.

What is even slightly out of sorts about comparing Ellen Pao to Paul Graham?

You don't think calling PG sociopathic or downright evil is hyperbolic?

That wasn't what was said, though. It wasn't particularly coherent, but it was a comparison between two prominent figures in two prominent online forums.

I don't think it's hyperbolic to say that both sites have an element of sociopathic and downright evil people influencing the culture. And reasonable people can still disagree about the level of accountability for the actions and inactions of Pao and Graham.

There are plenty of details that don't line up well when making that comparison, but I read the comment as intending to illustrate all the hyperbole around Ellen Pao. There are a lot of people on the Internet talking past each other this week.

Haven't been around here long, but this place seems to me to be much better than reddit for what I'm looking for. To each his/her own, I guess, but so much of reddit was such utter and total shit for so long that the enjoyment evaporated.

How can I have evidence for an opinion other than expressing it?