Edit: I partially misunderstood the parent comment. See below.
Your viewpoint is antithetical to open intellectual discourse. You specifically call for censorship on political grounds, not even because of something that could be construed as an attack. To quote:
> but their views only come across in the content they post here, not as a form of attacking other groups on the site or off the site
Fringe political ideas should not be suppressed, especially if they aren't even attacking anyone. HN's decent level of open discourse is not a "problem", it's one of the things that makes this site better than e.g. Reddit.
I never called for censoring groups, I was just outlining the problems faced here. If you read back up to parent, what I'm trying to get at is saying that despite HM harboring these regressive actors, at no point are they mobilizing or openly attacking others, so Facebook style content removal or moderation does not cross-apply here. I think we may be more on the same page than you realize
Although their views may be seen as rephrensible from my perspective I still see their value as contributors to this site considering most topics that they are contributing to discussion on won't bring up these issues
You think Reddit has a lack of "open discourse"? That's strange. While Reddit has problems with brigading and the like, so does HN. So if Reddit has a problem, and HN does not. How do HN and Voat compare? Or HN and 4chan? Or HN and 8chan?
Your viewpoint is antithetical to open intellectual discourse. You specifically call for censorship on political grounds, not even because of something that could be construed as an attack. To quote:
> but their views only come across in the content they post here, not as a form of attacking other groups on the site or off the site
Fringe political ideas should not be suppressed, especially if they aren't even attacking anyone. HN's decent level of open discourse is not a "problem", it's one of the things that makes this site better than e.g. Reddit.