I disagree with the rampant flagging practices that many HNers engage in, but I do think it's worth noting that it's not always "censorship" as much as it is people pre-flagging topics that are likely to result in a contentious flamewar in the comment section. Of course plenty of stories are killed because they go against the narrative that a particular reader likes, so there definitely is some censorship, but it's a lot more nuanced than that IMHO.

> s people pre-flagging topics that are likely to result in a contentious flamewar in the comment section.

I’ve never understood this argument: if you don’t want to participate in a discussion, then don’t, but why stop others from doing so? No one is obligated to click into the comments section, read, or take part in any discussion on HN. Even when discussions get heated, in my experience they’re still better than similar discussions elsewhere on the internet.

> Of course plenty of stories are killed because they go against the narrative that a particular reader likes, so there definitely is some censorship

I think this is the main reason for flagging.

If you don't think there's active censorship of certain topics from HN leadership you're naive beyond belief. There's a reason that most of the topics that get auto-flagged also happen to be a threat to the financial interests of YC and its backers.