Discuss.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (73)
sorted by:
Discuss.
You're placing trust in mods that ban based on political affiliation and usernames they don't like. This is all just for show. No one elected them, it's all been factored in.
Both have made it clear they will remove posts they themselves don't like, and invent new rules to restrict them in the future - regardless of what the population thinks.
It's the closest you can get to an agreement between users.
I don't understand your point: is it better to not have a mod? there is a reason it is being discussed and it is that there should be one.
As of right now, yes - less moderation is better because the users can decide via votes. But the political minority are upset they see opposing views, and cause a bunch of trouble and terrorize the posters to justify a police state, which is what kills content.
That's why they're crying for more mods. They want to censor posts they don't like. It's not going to be the trouble makers that get removed. It'll be largely my content.
Funny how using the block feature just isn't an option...
I don't think so.
We got chill there for months without an active mod, and now there is an user trashing up the board by himself, you know who, and there is request for moderation again.
That's the point. His goal is another Reddit. That's why he causes all these problems. It's communism 101.