Re:Unity's oldest community announces dissolution
by midoridensha on Wednesday September 27, 2023 @10:01PM
(#37684275)
You're the one trolling about anti-vax conspiracy theory bullshit here, with a 2-day old account. Fuck off.
Re:Unity's oldest community announces dissolution
by betamist on Thursday September 28, 2023 @02:22AM
(#37685980)
I’m glad we got to the point where you show your true soul :) for what it’s worth, I support your right to say and disagree, tho I think you need to find a better way to express yourself.
Have a nice day!
Re:Unity's oldest community announces dissolution
by midoridensha on Thursday September 28, 2023 @04:36AM
(#37686932)
Yes, and you showed your true self too: you used this as an opportunity to push your anti-vax conspiracy theory bullshit. So again, go fuck yourself, troll.
Re:Unity's oldest community announces dissolution
by betamist on Thursday September 28, 2023 @06:59AM
(#37687854)
> you used this as an opportunity to push your anti-vax conspiracy theory bullshit
I'm not anti-vax at all! What did I say that made you think so?
> So again, go fuck yourself, troll.
I'm not trolling at all. And you're breaking multiple HN guidelines in your last three replies: name-calling, dismissiveness, snark, and you're definitely not maintaining a respectful tone.
Maybe you're the one that needs to be hanging around on 8chan?
Re:Unity's oldest community announces dissolution
by dang on Friday September 29, 2023 @12:48AM
(#37699389)
We've banned this account for egregiously breaking the site guidelines and ignoring our request to stop.
Commenters here need to stick to the rules regardless of how right they are or feel they are. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email [email protected] and give us reason to believe that you'll use the site as intended in the future.
Side note honest question, do you think your comment falls under flaming and should be flagged? What you’re basically baiting me here. Wouldn’t this last bit be a direct way that leads to exchanging insults between each other? I don’t know what’s your intended point behind it, but it certainly could be interpreted this way imo.
Regardless, I think there’s for the least possible amount of moderation based on subjective opinions. If you want to have a constructive discussion about Covid response, you have to listen to all opinions and have them openly discussed for example.
There are hundreds of times that comments about mask mandates for example that get flagged, just because people disagree with the CDC. Eventually now we see it more openly discussed (1) after a few years, but still some politically motivated people think it’s a topic deserving censorship.
1: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/21/opinion/do-mask-mandates-...