This is an important topic since HN appears to be a news site that uses social up/down voting, but really is a highly moderated platform, where moderators have full power to censor and shadow ban for any reason without any transparency.<p>I was shadow banned for my submission about Amazon’s power over my small Amazon business, an important topic in which I received national media attention from NBC, former editors of Vice News, etc.<p>However, an HN moderator did not like the article, so he shadow banned me.<p>I understand there are cases for shadow banning, such as trolls, spam accounts etc, but my submission was a highly significant news worthy article that received national media attention, that did not deserve this treatment due to one HN moderators opinion.<p>HN lacks moderator transparency. Readers believe they are being shown a curated list of relevant news from their peers, but really are just seeing the topics and views that closely align with HN moderators opinions.