> That most stories that suddenly get sunk like a brick don't get that status is a fact, from which follows that it can't be automatic per URL, since they float and rise naturally for a few minutes or hours, sometimes to the very top, and then sink quickly, or even sink several pages at once.

I believe there's also the user posting history taken into account when weighting submissions.

> > You are the one complaining you don't see what you want to see on the front page.

> If I don't like something on the front page, I hide it for myself. I don't try to take it away from others, and I'm complaining about people who are doing exactly that.

Good point but since HN has no elaborated editorial policies per design what's put forefront comes organically from what is flagged/up-and-downvoted by the community as a whole. That's what gives HN its vibes, otherwise you'd end up spending your days curating your list since there are no filters (tag-based, source-based, whatever).

> It's the big black box of plausible deniability, of "I didn't see anything, you must be the problem".

Don't really know what you mean. I saw HK posts on the front page. Maybe you wish I had seen more ?

> > I don't think you can be reasoned with if you hold the position that downvoting/upvoting/flagging is downright censoring.

> Like that's just a general flag you get to set on a person while doing no damage to your own credibility at all.

> I'm saying in, context of that quote, that it's "violence", as opposed to intellectually honest and open debate,

Hmm. Agreed.

> I stand by that, if all you have to say is "that's so silly I don't even have to argue against it"

I did say more and I didn't say it was silly. If you believe downvoting and flagging is strictly censoring then no matter what can be said you'll always keep coming back to your narrative that HN is being gamed about HK. From the get-go your position is that HN is censoring things by design AND that it can and is actually being gamed to increase censorship. There's no space left to debate then and nothing I can say about what HN is (or what I think is) will make you change your mind or consider other explanations for what hits the front page.

> "that's so silly I don't even have to argue against it", I just note that you can't or don't want to argue against it.

Disagreed. I did. And what you should read into that is that I believe our positions are not compatible.

> Like you have this narrative about why some things get flagged, without any proof, then keep shifting goal posts without even acknowledging that you're shifting them?

I don't think I moved any goal posts. You claim the front page is manipulated, I say it's unlikely and you reply I am wrong. I may be wrong. But extraordinary proofs and all that. Here's an old article about HN ranking http://www.righto.com/2013/11/how-hacker-news-ranking-really... (you can google for some others). If you believe HN is being manipulated, collect raw data, do the analysis and submit it ? I am sure many people on HN would like to have a look. Also, you mail dang if you find anything substantial (see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13727487).

Personally, I believe the apparent simplicity of the site hide the huge amount of people upvoting, downvoting and submitting links. There's only 30 slot on the front page to fill.

edit: don't get me wrong, I have seen and been in thread on imgur in which pro-chinese individuals promoted alternative facts regarding the tien-an men events a few weeks ago. With whole snippets of conversations set up in advance ("how can china not admit the massacre ?", "no, the US is lying about tienanmen, read this article", "oh, interesting, thanks for opening my mind about it"). It was crude but fascinating nonetheless.

Somehow I hope the HN crowd knows how to get facts about events and doesn't rely on HN only for staying up-to-date with current events.