Doesn't matter, any time you get into value judgements, it's an opinion, not a fact.
Regardless of whether that's true, it doesn't break the rules, because it wasn't against an entire group, and I did not say they were inferior or conspiring. Criticism is not against the rules. Opinions and value judgements (even negative ones) are not against the rules. The whole reason why KiA2 even exists in the first place is to point out problems and criticize them. Do you not know the history of KiA2?
Did Americans "steal" land from the Native Americans? Are Americans greedy and selfish? See the problem now?
Yes they did steal land from the Native Americans, that is a historical fact, not an opinion. They did it in various ways, including murdering many Native Americans, breaking agreements, colonization and immigration, etc. Similarly, Israel's stealing of Palestine is a historical fact, not an opinion.
Except "the Jews are greedy and selfish". That was an opinion.
So what do you call it when somebody decides to steal something from somebody else simply because they wanted it? That's the dictionary definition of greedy and selfish.
Also "Jewish bankers".
I notice that you didn't include the full context of what I said. I specifically mentioned the Rothchilds (who were indeed Jewish bankers), because they were heavily involved in the Balfour Declaration. This is all public knowledge.
That would be like saying that all black people seek to advance "the black agenda", which should sound stupid to any reasonable person.
Except I never said that, I mentioned specific Jewish bankers, except you intentionally omitted the full sentence of what I said.
The purpose of shadow banning is to make people think that they are not banned, even though they are banned. By its nature it is deceptive.
This leads to a situation where everybody is censored, but nobody realizes that they are being censored. Because people do not realize they are being censored, they do not fight back against the censorship.
And nobody even knows exactly what is being censored, it is up to the whim of the admins. It concentrates all of the power into the admins, now a single admin can control what millions of people see (and don't see), without anybody even realizing it's happening. It is extremely insidious.
Transparency and honesty are incredibly important, you cannot have a society without those two principles. People need to understand what is happening, and why it is happening. Shadow banning is the complete opposite of that.
Also if he said "comment removed" and you can make this post it's not shadow banning.
I noticed it because I went back to the post and refreshed it, it's also how I noticed the shadow banning on YouTube (where comments are silently removed without anybody noticing).
I agree that this is a mild form of shadow banning (compared to other much worse sites), but it is still shadow banning.
When did I ever claim that Jews are conspiring? I mentioned specific Zionist Jews (whose names and actions are all public knowledge, they publicly admit what they did), and I criticized Israel, I never attacked Jews as an entire group. Unless you are claiming that criticizing some Jews is the same as attacking all Jews? Which is odd, since many Jews are against the actions of Israel.
The specific rules are pointless if the moderators ignore them and ban anything on a whim. If the moderation is vague, then it doesn't matter how specific the rules are.
So either the moderation needs to become more precise, or the rules need to be made more vague (to match the moderator's behavior). Right now there is a disconnect, people post things thinking that it is within the rules, but then they get arbitrarily banned anyways. That defeats the point of having rules in the first place.
I already posted both in my original comment... the screenshot was clearly taken after the post was deleted, and I also posted a link to the original thread:
https://kotakuinaction2.win/p/13zgboK2ki/talmudic-doctrine-nonjews-are-no/c/
I'm not sure what you mean by "hide my power level", I simply answered Jester's question with historical facts. Is that not allowed on this site?
According to science, culture is not the driving factor in behavior, genes are:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioural_genetics#Additional_general_findings
Also IQ is 80% genetic:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ
Genes cause culture, not the other way around. That's why certain groups of people always tend toward the same culture, and other groups of people always tend toward a different culture.
So you agree that it is okay for the moderators to shadow ban comments which do not violate the rules?
If the moderators do not want "redpill content" as you call it, then they should make that a rule, and not just arbitrarily ban whatever they want on a whim.
Also, KIA2 does shadow banning: when I am logged in I can see my (deleted) comment, but when I am logged out I cannot. Shadow banning is incredibly evil, and should never be tolerated, especially on a free speech site.
I just got my comment deleted, even though it did not break any rules:
https://files.catbox.moe/8g62zt.png
I never once attacked anybody based on their identity.
Apparently I am not allowed to point out objective historical facts which are public knowledge and widely agreed upon.
I am also not allowed to point out the blatant human rights abuses done by Israel against Palestinians, even though I was simply responding to a question that Jester had asked.
It seems that Israel is above the law, and above criticism, they are the only country that is allowed to do extreme human rights abuses and yet nobody is allowed to talk about it.
Slippery slope isn't even a fallacy, it's only a fallacy if there is zero evidence for the slippery slope. But if there is evidence, then it's no longer a fallacy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope#Non-fallacious_usage
But statistically, women have 4.5 times more in-group bias than men. In fact, men have almost no in-group bias:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women-are-wonderful_effect