At Reddit. Not here. Though, personally, I think we'd benefit from losing VentureWire and ITWorld.

and Extreme Tech, PandoDaily, TechCrunch, New York Times, Wired, GigaOM, CNN, CNBC, and so on. It's not like HN would be worse without them.

We'd be worse off without the NYT datavis posts.

The rest, I agree! Pando and TechCrunch in particular.

Don't hold your breath, though. Banning those sites would do a disservice to YC's portfolio; one of the tangible benefits of being in YC is easier access to the trade press. I really don't expect to see 'pg do anything to alienate anybody who could potentially write a useful story about a YC company.

(I'm fine with that as a cost of "not having to run a site like HN myself".)

Well, I hope the NYT articles (even the non datavis ones) provide a benefit other than normalizing relations between hackers and the general public. If the world needs to be better informed about the affairs of hackers, the hackers also benefit from knowing more about the world.

I personally disagree with regards of wired. And not only because I submit quite regularly from them (I just found out about, so don't be to harsh!). They sometimes have some interessting stuff. For me, again this is only my personal opinion, as long as a certain article has the potential to start interessting dicussions AND isn't just bait, I submit it.

But banning what one could call mainstream media from HN wouldn't do it favour. My impression is that I'm no the only non-hacker around here, so not strictly tech issues have their justification as far as I'm concerened. And if some content shows up that just doesn't fit, well simply don't vote for it or simply flag it. I for my part don't care who submitted a certain article or from which source as long as it's a good read or a good discussions. Perfect if it's both. Just my 5 cents.

Disclaimer: Not working for any of the above mentioned news outlets, and I don't even have a wired subscription. :-)

I'd vote for keeping NYT and Wired - however it's hard to algorithmically enforce the "only post original, substantive articles" rule. (I guess that's what voting and flagging and for though.)

I'd support banning TC and PandoDaily from HN

I think you need to say why TC And Pando are deserving and no disliking MA is not a valid reaseon

That depends on whether you value the HN as a set of links, or as a place to discuss topics of the day. If it's the latter, then which particular articles are put up is of less importance than the quality of the comments and moderation system here on HN. I wonder how many people actually click the links and visit articles before commenting? The numbers might surprise us.

Phys.org and sciencedaily.com can go too, but they rarely get posted here.

They really clog up the science subreddits with wildly hyperbolic titles that get debunked in the first comment.

Why is that a bad thing? If these outlets are spouting off lies/bad science then having this behaviour noted is a good thing, indeed it's a great thing IMO.

You forgot TheNextWeb.

TheVerge too. +1 for dropping TechCrunch unless the post is by Mark Suster, in which case, whitelist that...

No, because the end result of that policy is cat pictures.