Ban HN posts with links behind paywalls – YES or NO?

[JimmyJamesJames]

Let’s be honest, we’ve all seen an interesting HN post, clicked through and then been frustrated the page is behind a WSJ or the verge paywall.

Wouldn’t it be better for society if the info was available to all?

[adamredwoods]

No. Good information can be behind a payed site, and possibly, more investigative. Free sites can sometimes be less verified or partial information. I think the goal would be to have the most accurate link possible, rather than many links that only contain a subset of the information.

[codingdave]

From the FAQ:

> Are paywalls ok?

> It's ok to post stories from sites with paywalls that have workarounds.

> In comments, it's ok to ask how to read an article and to help other users do so. But please don't post complaints about paywalls. Those are off topic.

[JojoFatsani]

You get what you pay for

[lordkrandel]

I'd say yes. If Hacker News is free, it makes no sense to have "ads" to buy news subscriptions. I won't buy a subscription for ALL the paywalled sites: NYTimes, Atlantic, Bloomberg, whatever. If it's posted here it's either free to read or useless

[toomuchtodo]

Optimize for the world you exist in, not the world you wish existed. No paywall link ban, although I’d be happy to pitch into a fund to buy gift links.

[KellyCriterion]

No.

WP or NYT behind paywall is totally OK: Some of the few quality media companies