I'd just read it as social friction, just like I'd read your comment as that very same thing.
This is the consensus mechanism doing its job, essentially.
__
Though to be fair, the way I frame it assumes no connections between nodes and independent choices, when in reality, we have groups supporting each other.
So it's not necessarily the best mechanism, as social cohesion and other such dysfunctions might be steering away from the objectively correct solution through not necessarily rational biases.
Or rather not necessarily rational when viewed in just the specific context, but possibly rational when zooming out and considering whole-subsystem health.
Low-effort content is generally discouraged on Hacker News because it lowers the quality of the site. It's not a deep commentary on socioeconomics.
Like posting the exact same personal brand-building under each new model you mean?
As said, there is no right or wrong here. Well, technically there is and it is my opinion (obviously), but if we take a step back, it's exactly what I just described and you (unfortunately) discarded through bulldozing.
The """"thought leaders"""" will have to live with the fact that some people just don't think that their work is adding all that much value. It's a bit unpleasant for the ego of course, but that's kinda the trade when making money with fluff.