We may remove content if we reasonably believe its spread could result in damage to physical infrastructure, injury of others...
So they're banning BLM?
...or the endangerment of public health
So they're banning troomers who groom people into transing themselves so they'll collect every STD known to man in degenerate sexual encounters?
I don't know why they don't just come out and announce they're banning "problematic" opinions. Both sides know that's what they're doing so they're not fooling anyone by speaking in code like this.
Both sides might know it, but there are still a lot undecided people that does not know, and this helps strengthen their (discord) casus belli when they remove stuff since it was against the TOS and only the enemy is against the TOS and so on.
So they're banning BLM?
So they're banning troomers who groom people into transing themselves so they'll collect every STD known to man in degenerate sexual encounters?
I don't know why they don't just come out and announce they're banning "problematic" opinions. Both sides know that's what they're doing so they're not fooling anyone by speaking in code like this.
Both sides might know it, but there are still a lot undecided people that does not know, and this helps strengthen their (discord) casus belli when they remove stuff since it was against the TOS and only the enemy is against the TOS and so on.
You know these answers.