No, you only ban accounts for people who don't toe the line to your ideology. IF you followed your own rules, there would be no problem. Why don't you follow your own guidelines?
Why isn't dang banned for his abuse and harassment of people?
You force me to edit my comment because you slow banned me. which means I can't respond to the people who are being abuseive.
Your moderation policy favors and encourages abuse...which is shown by the abuse that dang heaped on someone earlier (Which I identified to you.)
Again, why isn't dang banned?
You don't get to pretend like I did something wrong when you're being completely dishonest and hypocritical.
You set up the rules that prevent me from responding, you have carefully cultivated a culture where those who agree with you ideologically know they can be abusive without risk, and you hellban people for, for instance, the crime of linking to scientific articles that disagree with your ideology.
Literally, I once created an account that had one and only one submission before it was hellbanned-- a comment link in to an article that undermined the global warming hypothesis, the "article" as published in a peer reviewed scientific paper. The link was the totality of the comment and it was relevant to the discussion. You cannot justify that, it is proof positive that the moderation policy of this site is ideological, and has nothing to do with civility or being substantive.
Of course you're going to ban me- this site cannot tolerate anyone who disagrees with your hardcore leftist ideology, and technology views, no matter how civil. You harass them, as you have harassed me, you abuse them as I caught dang abusing someone before, and then you ban them.
You insist on an echo chamber. Enjoy it. But don't for a second pretend like you have any moral high ground, you lying piece of shit.
Do you even realize you're an anti-intellectual?
--------------------
The censored comment was:
[Sigh, despite giving a description of how this works, meaning that aperture and sensor size are actually irrelevant, I'm being downvoted to hell, for the "crime" of pointing out how Apple has done something new. Most of the comments are ignorant, and obviously fanboy nonsense.
This site does not appreciate substantive and civil comments when said comments go against its biases (in this case, hatred of Apple and love of all things google.)
Further, because I am slow banned I cannot even reply to people.
Therefore, I have given a substantive and civil comment, it is being misrepresented and I can't respond.
Fuck this bullshit. You don't get to see what I said originally.]
Proof hacker news does not give a fuck about substantive and civil discussion, but only about agreeing with the moderators ideology.
Enjoy your echo chamber!
(and yes, I expect to be banned. I knew creating an account I would be banned because this site is run by assholes who will not follow their own rules and when caught breaking them, they delete the comments exposing their hypocrisy.)
Why isn't dang banned for his abuse and harassment of people?
You force me to edit my comment because you slow banned me. which means I can't respond to the people who are being abuseive.
Your moderation policy favors and encourages abuse...which is shown by the abuse that dang heaped on someone earlier (Which I identified to you.)
Again, why isn't dang banned?
You don't get to pretend like I did something wrong when you're being completely dishonest and hypocritical.
You set up the rules that prevent me from responding, you have carefully cultivated a culture where those who agree with you ideologically know they can be abusive without risk, and you hellban people for, for instance, the crime of linking to scientific articles that disagree with your ideology.
Literally, I once created an account that had one and only one submission before it was hellbanned-- a comment link in to an article that undermined the global warming hypothesis, the "article" as published in a peer reviewed scientific paper. The link was the totality of the comment and it was relevant to the discussion. You cannot justify that, it is proof positive that the moderation policy of this site is ideological, and has nothing to do with civility or being substantive.
Of course you're going to ban me- this site cannot tolerate anyone who disagrees with your hardcore leftist ideology, and technology views, no matter how civil. You harass them, as you have harassed me, you abuse them as I caught dang abusing someone before, and then you ban them.
You insist on an echo chamber. Enjoy it. But don't for a second pretend like you have any moral high ground, you lying piece of shit.
Do you even realize you're an anti-intellectual?
--------------------
The censored comment was: [Sigh, despite giving a description of how this works, meaning that aperture and sensor size are actually irrelevant, I'm being downvoted to hell, for the "crime" of pointing out how Apple has done something new. Most of the comments are ignorant, and obviously fanboy nonsense. This site does not appreciate substantive and civil comments when said comments go against its biases (in this case, hatred of Apple and love of all things google.) Further, because I am slow banned I cannot even reply to people. Therefore, I have given a substantive and civil comment, it is being misrepresented and I can't respond. Fuck this bullshit. You don't get to see what I said originally.]
Proof hacker news does not give a fuck about substantive and civil discussion, but only about agreeing with the moderators ideology.
Enjoy your echo chamber!
(and yes, I expect to be banned. I knew creating an account I would be banned because this site is run by assholes who will not follow their own rules and when caught breaking them, they delete the comments exposing their hypocrisy.)