No, they said that some groups (which they refused to specify) don't count as vulnerable identities.
That's why I do the "Reddit Apartheid" copypasta every time the rule gets invoked:
Reddit's recent Apartheid ruling asserts that whatever Reddit defines to be morally degenerate races are not subject to equal protection under the law. I cannot ethically abide by that. However, I can examine this work for it's possible "promotion of hate" as an extension of the harassment rule.
They specifically cited that some groups are not considered vulnerable, and the promotion of hate against them would not be covered by that rule.
They originally used the term "Majority" instead of vulnerable, but it made absolutely no sense. They were using a euphemism treadmill to cover for the fact that they believe certain demographics are inherently morally degenerate and are undeserving of equal protection
No, they said that some groups (which they refused to specify) don't count as vulnerable identities.
That's why I do the "Reddit Apartheid" copypasta every time the rule gets invoked:
They specifically cited that some groups are not considered vulnerable, and the promotion of hate against them would not be covered by that rule.
They originally used the term "Majority" instead of vulnerable, but it made absolutely no sense. They were using a euphemism treadmill to cover for the fact that they believe certain demographics are inherently morally degenerate and are undeserving of equal protection