Earlier quoted context omitted.
I liked the article, I just hate the inconsistency here on HN when it comes to humorous/evocative submissions and comments. We scold some for violating the guidelines, and we bless others. Can we sometimes be more relaxed about what is submitted? If the answer is yes as you are indicating, can we make it this way all the time? Ultimately the evolving community here will make the final judgement. I just feel that the…
We scold some for violating the guidelines, and we bless others. That's really the curse of comedy. The whole point of comedy is to be subversive, to sneak in under the radar of "good taste" and "propriety." But it's hard to do that, a lot of the time it gets rejected out of hand, and it seems very inconsistent.
Comedy is subversive, but the venue is usually not. When a comedian gives a routine on stage, the audience is primed and has certain expectations. When the audience's expectations are not aligned, it is bad for both the comedian and the audience.
My limited experiences on HN as a junior user have yielded a certain kind of fuzziness as to what is acceptable. On any given day, there is a lot of variance in the content, but usually HNish and that's a good thing. Officially, the guidelines are posted and they have an emphasis on intellectual stuff/tone, but leave evocative content unexplained. So the community decides, which is usually sporadic, hap-hazard, heavily-dependent on who posted the submission (people have expectations about what Zed Shaw is going to say), and the touchiness of the content. This probably doesn't happen in other communities that are more clearly guided as either relaxed or strict.