But that ignore the other kinds of discussion, where there is nothing deeply interesting being said. The discussions where people enter with fixed views, and argue from those viewpoints, and cherry pick the data that supports their viewpoints, and ignore the data that argues against their viewpoints.
The intensely, but shallowly, interesting articles are harmful.
I like the light-touch user moderation applied so far, but maybe it's time for a few trusted long time members to have a down-vote hammer - a button that gives between 3 to 10 instant downvotes - to help moderate unsuitable behaviour, and a megaflag - something that gives super powerful flags to move stuff off the front page.
I agree. Well-kept gardens die by pacifism [0]. It's not the "political" topics per se that should be eliminated, but the "discussions where people enter with fixed views, and argue from those viewpoints, and cherry pick the data that supports their viewpoints, and ignore the data that argues against their viewpoints" - these should be constantly and consistently downvoted to hell and below.
The intensely, but shallowly, interesting articles are harmful.
I like the light-touch user moderation applied so far, but maybe it's time for a few trusted long time members to have a down-vote hammer - a button that gives between 3 to 10 instant downvotes - to help moderate unsuitable behaviour, and a megaflag - something that gives super powerful flags to move stuff off the front page.