I started to notice some people posting NYT, Bloomberg or other websites with hard paywalls, that leads to people in the comments that are unable to read the article to discuess the headline without any analysis and some times spreading misinformation, which cannot be countered by the article, due to the paywall.
Which bring me to this: Why does no one thought about blocking hard paywalled articles for the sake of quality of discussion?
Some of us subscribe to some of them, sometimes they're gift links, other times we can use archive.is or the Wayback machine to get access. Bonus points when these mirror links are in the post body.
It's important to link the canonical source though.
Type your favorite archive site mirror into the address bar (I'm partial to archive.is) then add a forward slash and then the full URL. I do this on my phone all the time.
You'll also often find someone posts an archive link on any articles with a hard pay wall - if you see such a link give them some internet points so they feel warm and fuzzy.
However, I would suggest that if you do decide to use this that you pick one or two of your favorite periodicals and either donate or subscribe to them. The Guardian and your local paper might be two good choices.
Also, if you have uBlock, turning off javascript can sometimes defeat a paywall.