SaidIt Survey: Ban /u/socks and /u/ActuallyNot or keep them around?

submitted by JasonCarswell from self.AskSaidIt

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Questionable 5 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 4 fun -  (3 children)

NO. And I refuse to look into 'the drama.' Please feel free to use the report button if you wish. Though I encourage you to use your clear abilities for articulating your points of view in debate instead.

Ĥ̅͛ǝ̮̺͕̲̰llo ʍoɹlp' I,m Qnǝsʇᴉouɐqlǝ.̬̘̟ͅ

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (2 children)

I have reported, collected evidence of rule-breaking, and now d3rr won't do anything.

So you like rule-breaking then? If they can do it everyone will start to.

[–]Questionable 5 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

I don't like echo chambers based on exclusion, and bans. There are many people I would outright ban if it weren't for my awareness of this slippery slope that leads to.... The creation of current day Reddit.

Ĥ̅͛ǝ̮̺͕̲̰llo ʍoɹlp' I,m Qnǝsʇᴉouɐqlǝ.̬̘̟ͅ

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

It's not about echo chambers. It's about civil discourse. They are rule breakers. I'd be after them if they were right or centrist or even voluntaryists that broke the rules with downward shit and name-calling.

The fact that they are proven liars, authoritarians, and big pharma shills is a bonus if they get banned for disrupting SaidIt by not obeying rules.