Play by our rules! What are the rules? We can't tell you, play by our rules!

If you read the full pm chain it's pretty easy to see the constant evasion and gaslighting by the head mod who wanted me to acknowledge a TOS violation without actually specifying what the mod decided was in violation. This was to prevent discussion of the ban decision.

There are two objectives when banning users

• prevent or suppress discussion of topics (Overton Window)
• remove unwanted users

He/she kept dancing around the primary question "what exactly was infringing" and was using doublespeak going so far as to claim I was unwilling to compromise when I repeatedly stated I was.

When asked "what in the submission or submission statement is a TOS violation"

The mod would ignore the question or repeatedly claimed they do not not determine TOS violations, yet...

• I was not sanctioned or contacted by any Admin
• A mod made a selective judgment on the submission and submission statement
• A mod removed the thread and perm banned my account

Knowing this course of action a mod should have been able to state when first asked what exactly in the submission or comment that caused them to hit the ban button.

I further asked for a list of banned topics so I would not violate their rules. I also listed what some might perceive as controversial topics and asked if they were permitted to prevent any future misunderstanding.

MOD Response: paraphrased (stated/unstated)

• you will not compromise
• we are ignoring your questions
• we can't tell you banned topics but agree you violated our interpretation of ambiguous TOS and agree to our hidden rules.

Suggesting that banned topics be listed publicly is again too much to ask because letting your users know what is off limits is apparently 'threatening the sub'. The thought process and responses I was receiving were evasive and total nonsense.

How exactly can a mod expect a user to agree not to post content or comments that infringes upon 'their rules' when they are not open about what topics are taboo?

They were not willing to communicate banned topics.

Toward the end of this discussion after muting, a mod slipped and gave one honest reply in a single sentence.

The mods (and possibly admin) interpret any submission or comment stating or implying that a 'biological male is a transgender woman' to be a TOS violation.

Saying or implying that a 'biological male is a transgender woman' is a scientific fact per human biology and not hate speech, misinformation, or disinformation. It's indisputable . Men have XY genetic chromosome pairings in their DNA as well as certain physical characteristics.

I said while I disagree that saying this is a TOS violation I repeatedly stated I was willing to compromise and not state a 'biological male is a transgender woman' in r/conspiracy to prevent any harm to the sub and prevent future misunderstandings or bans.

That should have been the end of it with the mod overturning the ban.

But that is not good enough, because one or more mods over there apparently prefer to cancel people for wrongthink who might share different opinions on topics on a personal level, despite communicating they are willing to play by rules that are open and publicly stated.

The mod team over there prefers running private blacklists for wrongthink and perm banning users for violating private rules.

Do you start to see the issue here?

Play by our rules! What are the rules? We can't tell you, play by our rules!

If you read the full pm chain it's pretty easy to see the constant evasion and gaslighting by the head mod who wanted me to acknowledge a TOS violation without actually specifying what the mod decided was in violation. This was to prevent discussion of the ban decision.

There are two objectives when banning users

• prevent or suppress discussion of topics (Overton Window)
• remove unwanted users

He/she kept dancing around the primary question "what exactly was infringing" and was using doublespeak going so far as to claim I was unwilling to compromise when I repeatedly stated I was.

When asked "what in the submission or submission statement is a TOS violation"

The mod would ignore the question or repeatedly claimed they do not not determine TOS violations, yet...

• I was not sanctioned or contacted by any Admin
• A mod made a selective judgment on the submission and submission statement
• A mod removed the thread and perm banned my account

Knowing this course of action a mod should have been able to state when first asked what exactly in the submission or comment that caused them to hit the ban button.

I further asked for a list of banned topics so I would not violate their rules. I also listed what some might perceive as controversial topics and asked if they were permitted to prevent any future misunderstanding.

MOD Response: paraphrased (stated/unstated)

• you will not compromise
• we are ignoring your questions
• we can't tell you banned topics but agree you violated our interpretation of ambiguous TOS and agree to our hidden rules.

Suggesting that banned topics be listed publicly is again too much to ask because letting your users know what is off limits is apparently 'threatening the sub'. The thought process and responses I was receiving was evasive and total nonsense

How exactly can a mod expect a user to agree not to post content or comments that infringes upon 'their rules' when they are not open about what topics are taboo?

They were not willing to communicate banned topics.

Toward the end of this discussion after muting, a mod slipped and gave one honest reply in a single sentence.

The mods (and possibly admin) interpret any submission or comment stating or implying that a 'biological male is a transgender woman' to be a TOS violation.

Saying or implying that a 'biological male is a transgender woman' is a scientific fact per human biology and not hate speech, misinformation, or disinformation. It's indisputable . Men have XY genetic chromosome pairings in their DNA as well as certain physical characteristics.

I said while I disagree that it is a TOS violation I repeatedly stated I was willing to compromise and not state a 'biological male is a transgender woman' in r/conspiracy to prevent any harm to the sub and prevent future misunderstandings or bans.

That should have been the end of it with the mod overturning the ban.

But that is not good enough, because one or more mods over there apparently prefer to cancel people who might share different opinions on topics on a personal level, despite communicating they are willing to play by rules that are open and publicly stated.

The mod team over there prefers running private blacklists for wrongthink and perm banning users for violating private rules.

Do you start to see the issue here?

Play by our rules! What are the rules? We can't tell you, play by our rules!

If you read the full pm chain it's pretty easy to see the constant evasion and gaslighting by the head mod who wanted me to acknowledge a TOS violation without actually specifying what the mod decided was in violation. This was to prevent discussion of the ban decision.

There are two objectives when banning users

• prevent or suppress discussion of topics (Overton Window)
• remove unwanted users

He/she kept dancing around the primary question "what exactly was infringing" and was using doublespeak going so far as to claim I was unwilling to compromise when I repeatedly stated I was.

When asked "what in the submission or submission statement is a TOS violation"

The mod would ignore the question or repeatedly claimed they do not not determine TOS violations, yet...

• I was not sanctioned or contacted by any Admin
• A mod made a selective judgment on the submission and submission statement
• A mod removed the thread and perm banned my account

Knowing this course of action a mod should have been able to state when first asked what exactly in the submission or comment that caused them to hit the ban button.

I further asked for a list of banned topics so I would not violate their rules. I also listed what some might perceive as controversial topics and asked if they were permitted to prevent any future misunderstanding.

MOD Response: paraphrased (stated/unstated)

• you will not compromise
• we are ignoring your questions
• we can't tell you banned topics but agree you violated our interpretation of ambiguous TOS and agree to our hidden rules.

Suggesting that banned topics be listed publicly is again too much to ask because letting your users know what is off limits is apparently 'threatening the sub'. The thought process and responses I was getting was evasive and total nonsense

How exactly can a mod expect a user to agree not to post content or comments that infringes upon 'their rules' when they are not open about what topics are taboo?

They were not willing to communicate banned topics.

Toward the end of this discussion after muting, a mod slipped and gave one honest reply in a single sentence.

The mods (and possibly admin) interpret any submission or comment stating or implying that a 'biological male is a transgender woman' to be a TOS violation.

Saying or implying that a 'biological male is a transgender woman' is a scientific fact per human biology and not hate speech, misinformation, or disinformation. It's indisputable . Men have XY genetic chromosome pairings in their DNA as well as certain physical characteristics.

I said while I disagree that it is a TOS violation I repeatedly stated I was willing to compromise and not state a 'biological male is a transgender woman' in r/conspiracy to prevent any harm to the sub and prevent future misunderstandings or bans.

That should have been the end of it with the mod overturning the ban.

But that is not good enough, because one or more mods over there apparently prefer to cancel people who might share different opinions on topics on a personal level, despite communicating they are willing to play by rules that are open and publicly stated.

The mod team over there prefers running private blacklists for wrongthink and perm banning users for violating private rules.

Do you start to see the issue here?

Play by our rules! What are the rules? We can't tell you, play by our rules!

If you read the full pm chain it's pretty easy to see the constant evasion and gaslighting by the head mod who wanted me to acknowledge a TOS violation without actually specifying what the mod decided was a violation. This was to prevent discussion of the ban decision.

He/she kept dancing around the primary question "what exactly was infringing" and was using doublespeak going so far as to claim I was unwilling to compromise when I repeatedly stated I was.

When asked "what in the submission or submission statement is a TOS violation"

The mod would ignore the question or repeatedly claimed they do not not determine TOS violations, yet...

• I was not sanctioned or contacted by any Admin
• A mod made a selective judgment on the submission and submission statement
• A mod removed the thread and perm banned my account

Knowing this course of action a mod should have been able to state when first asked what exactly in the submission or comment that caused them to hit the ban button.

I further asked for a list of banned topics so I would not violate their rules.

I also listed what some might perceive as controversial topics and asked if they were permitted to prevent any future misunderstanding.

MOD Response: paraphrased (stated/unstated)

• you will not compromise
• we are ignoring your questions
• we can't tell you banned topics but agree you violated our interpretation of ambiguous TOS and agree to our hidden rules.

Suggesting that banned topics be listed publicly is again too much to ask because letting your users know what is off limits is apparently 'threatening the sub'.

The thought process and responses I was getting was evasive and total nonsense

How exactly can a mod expect a user to agree not to post content or comments that infringes upon 'their rules' when they are not open about what topics are taboo?

They were not willing to communicate banned topics.

Toward the end of this discussion after muting, a mod slipped and gave one honest reply in a single sentence.

The mods (and possibly admin) interpret any submission or comment stating or implying that a 'biological male is a transgender woman' to be a TOS violation.

Saying or implying that a 'biological male is a transgender woman' is a scientific fact per human biology and not hate speech, misinformation, or disinformation. It's indisputable . Men have XY genetic chromosome pairings in their DNA.

I said while I disagree that it is a TOS violation I repeatedly stated I was willing to compromise and not state this in r/conspiracy to prevent any harm to the sub and prevent future misunderstandings or bans.

That should have been the end of it with the mod overturning the ban.

But that is not good enough, because one or more mods over there apparently prefer to cancel people who might share different opinions on topics on a personal level, despite communicating they are willing to play by rules that are open and publicly stated.

The mod team over there prefers running private blacklists for wrongthink and perm banning users for violating private rules.

Do you start to see the issue here?

Play by our rules! What are the rules? We can't tell you, play by our rules!

If you read the full pm chain it's pretty easy to see the constant evasion and gaslighting by the head mod who wanted me to acknowledge a TOS violation without actually specifying what the mod decided was a violation. This was to prevent discussion of the ban decision.

He/she kept dancing around the primary question "what exactly was infringing" and was using doublespeak going so far as to claim I was unwilling to compromise when I repeatedly stated I was.

When asked "what in the submission or submission statement is a TOS violation"

The mod would ignore the question or repeatedly claimed they do not not determine TOS violations, yet...

• I was not sanctioned or contacted by any Admin
• A mod made a selective judgment on the submission and submission statement
• A mod removed the thread and perm banned my account

Knowing this course of action a mod should have been able to state when first asked what exactly in the submission or comment that caused them to hit the ban button.

I further asked for a list of banned topics so I would not violate their rules.

I also listed what some might perceive as controversial topics and asked if they were permitted to prevent any future misunderstanding.

MOD Response: paraphrased (stated/unstated)

• you will not compromise
• we are ignoring your questions
• we can't tell you banned topics but agree you violated our interpretation of ambiguous TOS and agree to our hidden rules.

Suggesting that banned topics be listed publicly is again too much to ask because letting your users know what is off limits is apparently 'threatening the sub'.

The thought process and responses I was getting was evasive and total nonsense

How exactly can a mod expect a user to agree not to post content or comments that infringes upon 'their rules' when they are not open about what topics are taboo?

They were not willing to communicate banned topics.

Toward the end of this discussion after muting, a mod slipped and gave one honest reply in a single sentence.

The mods (and possibly admin) interpret any submission or comment stating or implying that a 'biological male is a transgender woman' to be a TOS violation.

Saying or implying that a 'biological male is a transgender woman' is a scientific fact per human biology and not hate speech. It's indisputable . Men have XY genetic chromosomes in their DNA.

I said while I disagree that it is a TOS violation I repeatedly stated I was willing to compromise and not state this in r/conspiracy to prevent any harm to the sub and prevent future misunderstandings or bans.

That should have been the end of it with the mod overturning the ban. But that is not good enough, because the mod over there apparently prefers to cancel people who might share different opinions on topics on a personal level, but are willing to play by rules that are open and publicly stated.

The mod team over there prefers running private blacklists for wrongthink and perm banning users for violating private rules.

Do you start to see the issue here?

Play by our rules! What are the rules? We can't tell you, play by our rules!

If you read the full pm chain it's pretty easy to see the constant evasion and gaslighting by the head mod who wanted me to acknowledge a TOS violation without actually specifying what the mod decided was a violation. This was to prevent discussion of the ban decision.

He/she kept dancing around the primary question "what exactly was infringing" and was using doublespeak going so far as to claim I was unwilling to compromise when I repeatedly stated I was.

When asked "what in the submission or submission statement is a TOS violation"

The mod would ignore the question or repeatedly claimed they do not not determine TOS violations, yet...

• I was not sanctioned or contacted by any Admin
• A mod made a selective judgment on the submission and submission statement
• A mod removed the thread and perm banned my account

Knowing this course of action a mod should have been able to state when first asked what exactly in the submission or comment that caused them to hit the ban button.

I further asked for a list of banned topics so I would not violate their rules.

I also listed what some might perceive as controversial topics and asked if they were permitted to prevent any future misunderstanding.

MOD Response: paraphrased (stated/unstated)

• you will not compromise
• we are ignoring your questions
• we can't tell you banned topics but agree you violated our interpretation of ambiguous TOS and agree to our hidden rules.

Suggesting that banned topics be listed publicly is again too much to ask because letting your users know what is off limits is apparently 'threatening the sub'.

The thought process and responses I was getting was evasive and total nonsense

How exactly can a mod expect a user to agree not to post content or comments that infringes upon 'their rules' when they are not open about what topics are taboo?

They were not willing to communicate banned topics.

Toward the end of this discussion after muting, a mod finally replied honestly.

The mods (and possibly admin) interpret any submission or comment stating or implying that a 'biological male is a transgender woman' to be a TOS violation.

Saying or implying that a 'biological male is a transgender woman' is a scientific fact per human biology and not hate speech. It's indisputable . Men have XY genetic chromosomes in their DNA.

I said while I disagree that it is a TOS violation I repeatedly stated I was willing to compromise and not state this in r/conspiracy to prevent any harm to the sub and prevent future misunderstandings or bans.

That should have been the end of it with the mod overturning the ban. But that is not good enough, because the mod over there apparently prefers to cancel people who might share different opinions on topics on a personal level, but are willing to play by rules that are open and publicly stated.

The mod team over there prefers running private blacklists for wrongthink and perm banning users for violating private rules.

Do you start to see the issue here?

Play by our rules! What are the rules? We can't tell you, play by our rules!

If you read the full pm chain it's pretty easy to see the constant evasion and gaslighting by the head mod who wanted me to acknowledge a TOS violation without actually specifying what the mod decided was a violation. This was to prevent discussion of the ban decision.

He/she kept dancing around the primary question "what exactly was infringing" and was using doublespeak going so far as to claim I was unwilling to compromise when I repeatedly stated I was.

When asked "what in the submission or submission statement is a TOS violation"

The mod would ignore the question or repeatedly claimed they do not not determine TOS violations, yet...

• I was not sanctioned or contacted by any Admin
• A mod made a selective judgment on the submission and submission statement
• A mod removed the thread and perm banned my account

Knowing this course of action a mod should have been able to state when first asked what exactly in the submission or comment that caused them to hit the ban button.

I further asked for a list of banned topics so I would not violate their rules.

I also listed what some might perceive as controversial topics and asked if they were permitted to prevent any future misunderstanding.

MOD Response: paraphrased (stated/unstated)

• you will not compromise
• we are ignoring your questions
• we can't tell you banned topics but agree you violated ambiguous TOS and agree to our hidden rules.

Suggesting that banned topics be listed publicly is again too much to ask because letting your users know what is off limits is apparently 'threatening the sub'.

The thought process and responses I was getting was evasive and total nonsense

How exactly can a mod expect a user to agree not to post content or comments that infringes upon 'their rules' when they are not open about what topics are taboo?

They were not willing to communicate banned topics.

Toward the end of this discussion after muting, a mod finally replied honestly.

The mods (and possibly admin) interpret any submission or comment stating or implying that a 'biological male is a transgender woman' to be a TOS violation.

Saying or implying that a 'biological male is a transgender woman' is a scientific fact per human biology and not hate speech. It's indisputable . Men have XY genetic chromosomes in their DNA.

I said while I disagree that it is a TOS violation I repeatedly stated I was willing to compromise and not state this in r/conspiracy to prevent any harm to the sub and prevent future misunderstandings or bans.

That should have been the end of it with the mod overturning the ban. But that is not good enough, because the mod over there apparently prefers to cancel people who might share different opinions on topics on a personal level, but are willing to play by rules that are open and publicly stated.

The mod team over there prefers running private blacklists for wrongthink and perm banning users for violating private rules.

Do you start to see the issue here?

Play by our rules! What are the rules? We can't tell you, play by our rules!

If you read the full pm chain it's pretty easy to see the constant evasion and gaslighting by the head mod who wanted me to acknowledge a TOS violation without actually specifying what the mod decided was a violation. This was to prevent discussion of the ban decision.

He/she kept dancing around the primary question "what exactly was infringing" and was using doublespeak going so far as to claim I was unwilling to compromise when I repeatedly stated I was.

When asked "what in the submission or submission statement is a TOS violation"

The mod repeatedly claimed they do not not determine TOS violations, yet...

• I was not sanctioned or contacted by any Admin
• A mod made a selective judgment on the submission and submission statement
• A mod removed the thread and perm banned my account

Knowing this course of action a mod should have been able to state when first asked what exactly in the submission or comment that caused them to hit the ban button.

I further asked for a list of banned topics so I would not violate their rules.

I also listed controversial topics and ask if they were permitted.

MOD Response: paraphrased (stated/unstated)

• you will not compromise
• we are ignoring your questions
• we can't tell you banned topics but agree you violated ambiguous TOS and agree to our hidden rules.

Suggesting that banned topics be listed publicly is again too much to ask because letting your users know what is off limits is apparently 'threatening the sub'.

The thought process and responses I was getting was evasive and total nonsense

How exactly can a mod expect a user to agree not to post content or comments that infringes upon 'their rules' when they are not open about what topics are taboo?

I said repeatedly I was willing to compromise, but they were not willing to communicate banned topics.

Do you start to see the issue here?

Play by our rules! What are the rules? We can't tell you, play by our rules!

If you read the full pm chain it's pretty easy to see the constant evasion and gaslighting by the head mod who wanted me to acknowledge a TOS violation without actually specifying what the mod decided was a violation. This was to prevent discussion of the ban decision.

He/she kept dancing around the primary question "what exactly was infringing" and was using doublespeak going so far as to claim I was unwilling to compromise when I repeatedly stated I was.

When asked "what in the submission or submission statement is a TOS violation"

The mod repeatedly claimed they do not not determine TOS violations, yet...

• I was not sanctioned or contacted by any Admin
• A mod made a selective judgment on the submission and submission statement
• A mod removed the thread and perm banned my account

Knowing this course of action a mod should have been able to state when first asked what exactly in the submission or comment that caused them to hit the ban button.

I further asked for a list of banned topics so I would not violate their rules.

I also listed controversial topics and ask if they were permitted.

MOD Response: paraphrased

• "you will not compromise"
• "we are ignoring your questions"
• "we can't tell you banned topics" but agree you violated ambiguous TOS and agree to our hidden rules.

Suggesting that banned topics be listed publicly is again too much to ask because letting your users know what is off limits is apparently 'threatening the sub'.

The thought process and responses I was getting was evasive and total nonsense

How exactly can a mod expect a user to agree not to post content or comments that infringes upon 'their rules' when they are not open about what topics are taboo?

I said repeatedly I was willing to compromise, but they were not willing to communicate banned topics.

Do you start to see the issue here?

Play by our rules! What are the rules? We can't tell you, play by our rules!

If you read the full pm chain it's pretty easy to see the constant evasion and gaslighting by the head mod who wanted me to acknowledge a TOS violation without actually specifying what it was to prevent discussion of the ban decision.

He/she kept dancing around the question.

When asked "what in the submission or submission statement is a TOS violation"

The mod repeatedly claimed they do not not determine TOS violations, yet...

• I was not sanctioned or contacted by any Admin
• A mod made a selective judgment on the submission and submission statement
• A mod removed the thread and perm banned my account

Knowing this course of action a mod should have been able to state when first asked what exactly in the submission or comment that caused them to hit the ban button.

How exactly can a mod expect a user to agree not to post content or comments that infringes upon 'their rules' when they are not open about what topics are taboo?

I said repeatedly I was willing to compromise, but they were not willing to communicate banned topics.

Do you start to see the issue here?