I don’t expect this to play particularly well here, and maybe I’m just being conspiratorial, but here goes:
I banned [email protected] from [email protected] earlier today- he literally posted a matt walsh youtube link and was being otherwise transphobic in a space where that gets you banned. (link)
one of jordanlunds removed comments w/ matt walsh video:
spoiler
the reason I put down was ‘trolling about neopronouns’ I stand by that, it was violating instance rules and was unacceptable behavior from a moderator of another instance.
Shortly after that I got banned from [email protected] for ‘trolling’. To be clear, jordanlund does not moderate [email protected], but the timing struck me as an odd coincidence.
The .world thread in question (link)
I was expressing my actual opinion/position on this, if anything the post I was replying to should be considered a rule 1 violation implying leftists are russian/under russian sway:
spoiler
The removed comments that I was banned (permanent) for were just me being earnest about my position, which you’re welcome to disagree with.
I don’t view protecting my rights as something worth sacrificing other people for, even if they’re on the other side of the planet. You can be mad at me or hate me for that, but I’m not trolling.
People replying felt it was reasonable to call me an idiot for example, yet another example of selective moderation. on .world.
I don’t have any conclusive proof that my banning Jordanlund and then getting banned are related other than the suspicious timing, I welcome clarification.
Anyway in the interest of neutrality and transparency I submit both my ban and jordanlunds for review.
“We should stop putting orphans into the orphan crushing machine.”
“What? Didn’t you know the other guy wants to put more orphans into the machine? I say we should be thankful for the old lower amount of orphans crushed.”
Way less orphans getting crushed than there were four days ago, right?
I see, so there is a base amount of crushed orphans you are okay with?
You just answered your question about why people don’t like liberals.
Because they have realistic goals that are obtainable while other groups go for unobtainable ones that cause more pain, death and environmental damage?
The famously realistic and effective liberals who for no reason at all keep losing governments to fascists.
I’m a firm believer in the legalization of all drugs knowing full well that it will cause people’s death and/or their descent into addiction, sex trafficking or slavery.
Does that make it the bad option?