Mod hat: I do not agree with this comment either, but that is not an excuse to break our civility rule. If you want to talk about why you think this person is incorrect, do it without insults.
Edit: I should add that this applied to OP as well, who has been banned for multiple civility rule violations.
You deleted a comment I made because you said it was incivil (not going to repeat it, but it’s in the modlog)
Was it because I pointed out that they were denying a genocide?
That’s the only thing that was remotely personal, and if that breaks the rules is it acceptable to instead just link sources explaining how Israel is committing a genocide?
Genocidal denial is just a pretty big deal in my eyes, so I want to know how mods are ok with addressing it. I felt that I was following the sidebar by commenting on the argument and not the user, but apparently I misunderstood something.
I wouldn’t have mentioned it, by their comment denying genocide is literally just a few comments down this chain…
You are free to explain why someone is denying genocide. You are not free to make that accusation because you do not know the reasoning behind their statements. People have the right to disagree that something is happening and be wrong. People also have a right to be ignorant about a subject and make ignorant statements. You, as a user, have a right to tell them why they are wrong or why their statement is not true.
You do not have the right to accuse someone of supporting genocide unless they are making a statement that calls for violence. That is against the rules. The comment you responded to did not call for violence.
I do not agree with their claim that genocide is not happening. People denied the Holocaust was happening while it was happening. That doesn’t mean they would have marched Jews into the ovens themselves if they had the chance.
If you disagree with my moderation, you are free to report it to the admins.
Well then I guess you will continue to be disappointed, as will the person who complained to me.
I was tired of the slap fight and deleted a lot of comments, including most of OP’s comments and then banned OP.
You’d think people would be happy OP was banned. Apparently not.
Edit: I should also note that the particular user who is complaining gets flagged constantly, their comments rarely deleted, and I know I’ve never banned them, so I’m sorry you both think I’m treating them so horribly.
Mod hat: I do not agree with this comment either, but that is not an excuse to break our civility rule. If you want to talk about why you think this person is incorrect, do it without insults.
Edit: I should add that this applied to OP as well, who has been banned for multiple civility rule violations.
User hat:
You deleted a comment I made because you said it was incivil (not going to repeat it, but it’s in the modlog)
Was it because I pointed out that they were denying a genocide?
That’s the only thing that was remotely personal, and if that breaks the rules is it acceptable to instead just link sources explaining how Israel is committing a genocide?
Genocidal denial is just a pretty big deal in my eyes, so I want to know how mods are ok with addressing it. I felt that I was following the sidebar by commenting on the argument and not the user, but apparently I misunderstood something.
I wouldn’t have mentioned it, by their comment denying genocide is literally just a few comments down this chain…
I love how the user you called that immediately proved they were one and wouldn’t listen.
You are free to explain why someone is denying genocide. You are not free to make that accusation because you do not know the reasoning behind their statements. People have the right to disagree that something is happening and be wrong. People also have a right to be ignorant about a subject and make ignorant statements. You, as a user, have a right to tell them why they are wrong or why their statement is not true.
You do not have the right to accuse someone of supporting genocide unless they are making a statement that calls for violence. That is against the rules. The comment you responded to did not call for violence.
I do not agree with their claim that genocide is not happening. People denied the Holocaust was happening while it was happening. That doesn’t mean they would have marched Jews into the ovens themselves if they had the chance.
If you disagree with my moderation, you are free to report it to the admins.
And that is the end of this discussion.
Wait now it’s uncivil to point out a genocide denier?
You are free to go to the modlog and see the comment that was deleted and see that it was clearly not a civil comment.
You can also see the many other uncivil comments that got removed, including many of OP’s comments.
Edit: OP was also banned while the person complaining was not.
I’ve read it a few times and honestly agree with OP that only that part reads as uncivil so I am confused
If you think “just casually denying genocide?” is a civil way to respond to someone, I guess you will continue to be disappointed.
Yes when that’s exactly what they are doing in their comments and comment history.
Well then I guess you will continue to be disappointed, as will the person who complained to me.
I was tired of the slap fight and deleted a lot of comments, including most of OP’s comments and then banned OP.
You’d think people would be happy OP was banned. Apparently not.
Edit: I should also note that the particular user who is complaining gets flagged constantly, their comments rarely deleted, and I know I’ve never banned them, so I’m sorry you both think I’m treating them so horribly.
Reddit 2.0