And you think "shallow dismissals" deserve to be flagged, and marked dead?

Really?

And the one-sided nature of flagging is also fine with you?

Not to mention I quite disagree with your analysis of things, for example #1 is not offtopic at all, it's a direct reply.

What about this comment (my comment): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42206831 which got flagged as well? Is that also a "shallow dismissal"?

I mean, the guidelines [0] explicitly say,

> Please don't post shallow dismissals

I think it's reasonable to flag items which violate the site guidelines.

> for example #1 is not offtopic at all, it's a direct reply

I didn't say it was offtopic, I said it was offtopic whataboutism. All whataboutism is offtopic. Its entire purpose is to terminate conversation about the allegation(s) in question. Just because someone posts a reply doesn't mean the reply is on-topic.

As for the linked post, it's whataboutism, a shallow dismissal, and an insult to boot. A non-shallow dismissal would respectfully and directly address the allegations presented in the warrant. You can disagree with the court without being disagreeable, but that precludes inflammatory statements like "If this was a real court..." (it is one).

> And the one-sided nature of flagging is also fine with you?

I expect to see a level of flagging against each side in rough proportion to that side's inflammatory, off-topic, or rule-violating posts. For example, you previously linked to blatant racism against arabs, expressing confusion as to why it got flagged. Isn't it obvious? Racism is bad, dude.

0: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html