Hacker News Guidelines

Except, mods don't elaborate.

Except of course that they do, though given volume and repetitiveness of moderation issues, this isn't in all cases, and often points to earlier threads:

A general search showing links to rationale / reasons: <by:dang please don't https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=>

You can also typically search Algolia for "by:dang" + the text used to describe what guideline was transgressed.

As I've noted elsewhere, HN operates on frictions and nudges: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37137757>

And you can always email mods for clarification, as has been noted several times already in this thread. Dang explicitly includes this option when banning established accounts in many cases.

In large part though, HN presumes adult behaviour, which includes the ability and inclination to research for yourself what you might have done wrong.

We're not talking about immature behavior, I'm specifically talking about things like people who have some disability, or people who are culturally different than the majority of HN, being largely excluded.

The adult behaviour I'd specified was "the ability and inclination to research for yourself what you might have done wrong". I fail to see at all how this would exclude anyone who might otherwise be capable of productively engaging with HN.

If you don't mind a late addition, it's also responding to comments as written, and not as one would prefer for them to have been written, as you're raising an objection not grounded in what I'd said.

Not all adults have that capacity.

If you don't mind, could you give some examples of what conditions interfere with what parts of that process, whilst preserving the capacity to otherwise engage productively on HN?

I think people with learning disabilities and people who do not understand the tone they are expressing over the internet can still contribute positively to conversations, they just need a little bit of grace.

Given the limitations described, what accommodations or "grace" do you propose?

I've already outlined that: clear expectations & when someone does something wrong, but otherwise seems to behave in good faith, explanations.