>The alternative would be far worse (demanding payment without a preview of what you're paying for).
"dishonest" may be too strong, perhaps just misleading - paywalled articles are often designed to appear as free articles. With a proper preview the reader would know as soon as they arrive that they will be expected to pay to read. I understand why sites prefer to hook you with partial content first, but that practice can appear deceptive.
>The problem with posting paywalled content isn't posting paywalled content. It's the entitled people who can't even be bothered to use well-known workarounds and instead completely derail discussions on political grounds.
I agree with you there - no one can post content from Wired anymore without someone starting a thread about the paywall. If you're not willing to read the article you should just not participate in the discussion about it.