Was banned for disagreeing with mods.
This sub is not a free speech sub (not site, meant sub).
They'll ban this account in minutes, because they're fucking facists that censor way more than any dipshit reddit mod.
If you keep censorsing me, I'll just continue to make new accounts and post. I don't care about upvotes.
This platform is too full of morons, shills, and bots to care about votes or use it as an actual reflection of peer sentiment.
Anyone else face similarly selective bans from these cunt mods?
The site is free speech, you won't get banned by the admins unless you do something illegal. Individual subs are not necessarily free speech and they can ban you there. How do you think I'm able to run subs like c/furryart, c/nekomimi, c/atheist, and so on?
I got banned from the pussies at The Donald because they couldn't handle or counter my pro-abortion stance. Got banned from consumeproduct because I'm not racist.
Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice...doesn't that ignore that Life equals Choice?
What are you talking about?
Might be a bot. Look at the name and what they quoted, and the response ignores context for the most part, beyond a potential keyword-based trigger.
And FYI, I know plenty of conservatives who are pro-choice. I myself don't really have a position on it.
I see the merits in both sides arguments and think it comes down to people valuing different things and having different morals. Nothing wrong with that.
It's an irreconcilable difference in morals that cannot be remedied with any amount of debate--it's used by the elites as a social wedge issue to manipulate and distract the public.
You might be right. His response makes even less sense.
Those who suggest "abortion" are tempting those who are "alive" to "choose" between Pro-life vs Pro-choice; while both sides ignore that Life equals Choice.
This is called a sleight of hand for those with eyes to see.
Before that...
a) to consent to a suggestion represents the choice to want or not want it.
b) those who make the suggestion can after getting the consent rebrand the resulting conflict (want vs not want) into for example pro-life (want) vs pro-choice (not want).
c) these conflicts are called "reason"; which side one chooses within is irrelevant to a conflict defined by suggestions from outside, and only those making the suggestions can define (idolatry); redefine (revisionism) and contradict (talmudic reasoning) the meaning that all the others are reasoning over.
d) so far the conflict of reason between pro-life vs pro-choice sustained over half a century of "abortion"...a mass sacrifice ritual among the consenting many as suggested by the few.
Well, my ban is proof that this is not true. At least from my perspective.
You did something illegal then. I've seen people straight up insult u/c and nothing happens to them.
I assume you still don't know the difference between mods and admins, nor the difference between a sub ban and site ban. If you were site banned by admins it's only because you did something illegal or otherwise broke the very simple and reasonable ToS. Provide proof if this is not the case. You haven't even linked us to your supposed site banned account.
Yeah, I definitely didn't do anything illegal. That's complete and total bs.
And I already told you the account name. HardTruths420.
Pretty sure it was one the mods here that issued the ban, too. Because as soon as I posted about them banning my account from a newly created alt (with a similar name... I think HardTruths423) I was banned within 5 minutes.
That's quite a coincidence. Especially since there's obviously no way that one post was illegal. Totally ridiculous. It's obviously an abusive mod.
https://scored.co/u/HardTruths420
That account is not site banned, what the fuck are you talking about?