Now will you answer a similar question? I spent a couple minutes looking through a single post on r/politics and found a couple of violent comments:
> Just do a 180 turn on gun reforms. They’ll take an armed population more seriously.
https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/c5og99/there_are_...
> It's because protests don't achieve anything. ... Riots on the other hand...
https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/c5og99/there_are_...
Do you think r/politics should be quarantined because of those two posts?
Unless that was an extremely unusual post, there are undoubtedly many more. How many more would make you want a quarantine?
You're basically saying that Reddit should never ban subreddits, which means that you don't even have a burden of proof for banning a subreddit. This means no matter what you're always against banning a subreddit on a privately owned website, yet you fawn at other reasons to justify it (fringe users, not enough data points, etc.)
Your proposed solution instead is that admins should police every user, when mods fail to, which just isn't scalable. Especially when the barrier to just creating a new account to bypass the ban is so low.
We've allowed privately owned companies to control the means of communication, without regulation.
It's time to bring back the laws that limited the phone companies and big three TV networks interference in politics, updated for the Internet.
What's your criteria for that? You're being pretty slippery right now by dodging questions.