I want to make it very clear that I have appealed this ban. Why?
It violates free speech. By having ill defined rules mods can apply how they choose and for not having any sense of due process. I had a real meaning behind what it was that I did. It was satire. It was me being critical of HW's pandering to the minority that cry loudly and often for changes, and him complying each fucking time without considering whether or not it was an objectively good decision for the site and the user base a whole. Cycle threads we need containment, comply, remove cycle its favoritism, comply. It just reminds me so much of feminist mentality, and the people that cater to it simply to get them to shut up (aka ~drama~ ). Now, the message wasn't immediately apparent, but what is most important to note is that my content was destroyed, deleted, and I was ban'd for 5 days. Assumption of guilt onto the accused while the accuser, mods, are assumed to be 1. innocent and not abusing power 2. correct in their determination. I understand that is how other sites do it, ban and then give appeals. HOWEVER, and it is a big however, if you want free speech then due process is very much tied to that. Instead of toxic spamming being loosely defined and the assumption that it could never serve the function of trying to have a message with meaning (aka SPEECH) then you are very much a handicap to free speech. Instead, direct the IPs used to do the spamming to a place to make their case to determine if they are truly spamming in a non productive/toxic way. FOR I would make the assertion of discrimination due to no clear definition or way that deals with it effectively without damaging freedom. I have often posted, i call funposting you may call spam and blanket the term to imply all funposting is toxic and serves no purpose ever, the webm file related. Why? It also had a message. It was in protest to the cry babies that are having tangible effects on the site. To get them to make those complaint threads so I could point it out to them that they were being cancerous. Yes, discrimination. I find it very curious indeed that my "spam" was assumed to be toxic and warranting of being deleted (spamming of the webm they got deleted but i didn't get ban'd) without any need of investigation, but the actual toxic spam, like 6-7-8, complaining about is not considered and dealt with as spam. Isn't making like 8 threads complaining about a fucking cat video spam? Is it not fucking cancerous?
I was given a 5 day ban on /b/ with 2 remaining. I hope HW lifts the ban and decides to not get herded into continued poor decision making. STOP catering to the minority whose first instinct to things they don't understand or don't like it fear and hate.