ETA for fuck’s sake, even this post had to be censored down to go through. It took about 15 attempts.

A few times recently I’ve had posts refuse to go through with great big ‘you’ve been blocked!’ banners.

It seems to be very sensitive to mentions of being mean to people, not advocacy, just mentioning the existence of certain topics, and it seems to be way too hair-triggered.

I just now tried to post about the ethics of meat consumption, and why people see certain aspects as more troubling than others. Certainly nothing explicit or provocative, just the difference in perception between harvesting meat and deliberate unkindess - as abstract concepts.

I refuse to do the stupid zoomer thing of cens*ring words with numbers and punctuation, and frankly I shouldn’t have to.

I’m not sure how you’re meant to be able to have a sane conversation about ethics or politics if you’re not allowed to mention people being mean. God knows what would happen if someone tried to report actions perpetrated in an akka-akka-kablooey-competition zone.

Could someone maybe take a look at the settings, because jesus christ.

  • @TheBananaKingOP
    2•1 year ago

    Even this reponse needs rephrasing all to hell. Come on. Are you telling me I can’t use the word meaning the main part of an article? The part between your neck and your legs, the HTML element where the visible part of the page goes. Mustn’t say it. Seriously. What a freaking clown show.

    1: nope. It’s repeatable and predictable, instant nope page or success, depending on content.

    2: Nope. I managed to post this here, but only after removing certain words about being mean, rhyming with violets and calm.

    3: I don’t doubt it, but unless the software is running on Eddie from HHGTTG, I don’t see how mentioning the topics could contribute to issues.

    4: Nope, this very item was getting noped, and the post wasn’t responding to an individual.

    5: nope, see points 1 and 4.