you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]kangaujack 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

To be fair, I also tried posting some stuff that wasn't inflammatory at all, just trying to get a GC perspective on media properties like certain video games and movies, especially where the subject of women's and other diversity is a prominent feature of those properties. Those posts weren't approved, even though I thought those familiar with the subject would offer some interesting perspectives.

I don't know how moderating a forum like this works, must be a lot of work. But I wish it'd be just a tad looser.

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

I do think it's a lot of work.

I just want people to be clear about what their platform is about. When rules accurately describe the de-facto policies, then people reading have an accurate impression about what viewpoints are being censored. It's exactly the problem that got GC invested and then banned -- they weren't hateful, but a lot of content they removed also didn't break their own stated rules. And I don't know what your experience with moderation was, but for me there was no appeals process, and sometimes I was even treated rudely or even with cruelty when trying to explain that a post was removed wrongly.