So much for "free speech"

submitted by [deleted] from self.Incels

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]magnora7 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (3 children)

Saidit has limits. It always has. You make cogent points, but we have to draw the line somewhere, and a post appearing to praise someone who is only known for their mass shooting, is not good.

[–]curryvirgin 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Appearing to who, known to who, as judged by who? I suppose the only relevant answer to all of this can be, 'saidit global admins'. Is there fear of a host refusing service to saidit, etc., if the wrong impressions can be made by passersby of innocuous content?

[–]magnora7 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, the admins are responsible for site-wide decisions. How could it be any other way? We made the site, we draw the lines. We have been very consistent about the lines we draw.

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

No he's known for being a legend