90+ day bans for "I don't like what this guy says" in this community of all places is absolutely ridiculous.
He does violate Rule 16, which exists for a very good reason - to protect the existence of the community. That said, I also think that the ban lengths are disproportionate. They are like that because DoM wants to treat everyone the same. If I were in his position, I'd go more easy on him because while his comments on women may be in technical violation of Rule 16, they are highly unlikely to cause the negative consequences Rule 16 attempts to prevent, while racial nonsense isn't, and he does do his best to not violate the rules (though he often fails).
But I'm not, so that's moot.
Just yesterday a Rule 2 violation got banned for only 2 days.
Any extra ban within 3 months leads to a doubling of the previous ban length. That was the policy on the subreddit. Almost no one got banned for long periods of time (the ultra-retards were just permabanned on sight), but the Imp is a special case.
geee and i wonder why the feds would give more attention if we say anything about jews.
That simply proves the point.
Though i think the real reason for the rule 16 that you admitted to setting up yourself , to be targeted specifically at any criticism against jews, is because of your own personal biasness
geee and i wonder why the feds would give more attention if we say anything about jews.
Who mentioned da Joooz specifically? I said racial hatred. And yeah, if you go around trash talking blacks in ways that are inappropriate, that will get federal attention.
They're not giving more attention to Harvard. You might want to consider going there with your fellow leftists.
you admitted to setting up yourself
I did?
to be targeted specifically at any criticism against jews
You're under the impression that you can't criticize Jews, or anyone?
He does violate Rule 16, which exists for a very good reason - to protect the existence of the community. That said, I also think that the ban lengths are disproportionate. They are like that because DoM wants to treat everyone the same. If I were in his position, I'd go more easy on him because while his comments on women may be in technical violation of Rule 16, they are highly unlikely to cause the negative consequences Rule 16 attempts to prevent, while racial nonsense isn't, and he does do his best to not violate the rules (though he often fails).
But I'm not, so that's moot.
Any extra ban within 3 months leads to a doubling of the previous ban length. That was the policy on the subreddit. Almost no one got banned for long periods of time (the ultra-retards were just permabanned on sight), but the Imp is a special case.
Imagine my shock.
What consequences?
Why? Because I also defended him on the merits?
Hosting, domain registrars, attention from the feds. Becoming Stormfront 2 is not a free lunch.
What can we learn from this, class? Could it be that Sex War crap is in no way threatening to power, contra to what TheImp and others say? I think so!
This goes well with your acknowledgement that the establishment is Zionist. It's almost as if /ourguys/ are the only actual opposition to the system.
Yes, I think so, though for transgenderism there is the counter-example of Jonathan Yaniv, if you remember that guy.
By your logic, the 52% of young people who support Hamas over Israel are the 'opposition' rather than its useful idiots.
geee and i wonder why the feds would give more attention if we say anything about jews.
That simply proves the point.
Though i think the real reason for the rule 16 that you admitted to setting up yourself , to be targeted specifically at any criticism against jews, is because of your own personal biasness
Who mentioned da Joooz specifically? I said racial hatred. And yeah, if you go around trash talking blacks in ways that are inappropriate, that will get federal attention.
They're not giving more attention to Harvard. You might want to consider going there with your fellow leftists.
I did?
You're under the impression that you can't criticize Jews, or anyone?