My new subreddit was banned.

submitted by teatii from (self.GenderCritical)

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted]  (17 children)

[removed]

    [–]its1342 21 insightful - 4 fun21 insightful - 3 fun22 insightful - 4 fun -  (16 children)

    We’re LiTeRaLlY not though. We aren’t here “to throw a tantrum” we’re here to regroup. Honestly come on, you can’t be that dense. The fact you actually followed us here to make sure we hear you whine about your feelings being hurt because women don’t want to include you is the real concern lmao

    [–][deleted]  (15 children)

    [removed]

      [–]KilgirlTrout 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

      Dude if you don't want to engage... don't.

      You obviously don't have anything to contribute other than pettiness.

      [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

      No, he has a point about GC's hypocricy, which btw has affected many female people too. It's not any more "petty" than everything GC women are fighting for.

      [–]teelo 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (12 children)

      Hey /u/homeless-g_c-mod go take a look at Rule 4 of this website. Reapprove my comment.

      [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

      I think they took themselves off /r/all and hopefully will be editing their sidebar soon to reflect the fact that the mods remove opinions they just don't like.

      Btw did you see my other post? Are you sure you were ever actually banned from GC? If you simply weren't subscribed you also would not have been able to post.

      [–]teelo 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

      Youre right:

      2 hours ago gparmesan edited settings (toggle allow in default/trending lists)

      BUT they did the settings change 2 hours after a wave of censorship. So Rule 4 was still broken.

      [–]homeless-g_c-mod 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

      We're building the site as we speak. I removed a couple posts about things like women wanting to be raped and eugenics which are clearly in opposition to the side bar. We are now off all.

      [–]teelo 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

      You removed a lot more than that. You removed a bunch of my comments, and I don't post about rape or eugenics. Build the site THEN enforce the rules, not the other way around. And don't retroactively remove comments from before you met the requirements of Rule 4.

      [–]teelo 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

      I'm sure. I browsed Reddit with custom CSS disabled.

      [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

      No it's not a custom css issue. I think there is the ability to say in the settings that "only subscribers may post" or something like that. Then I think you would not have seen the reply option, if you were not subscribed, even if you were not banned. See what I'm trying to say?

      [–]teelo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

      No, there isn't. Its a CSS option some subs use to hide the reply button for users who aren't subscribed. Same with subs that hide the downvote button. All a user has to do is block custom CSS and those rules go away.