To be fair, any forum you post in by definition must suck at least a little

whoa whoa whoa ******s are protected groups too now, I think. HARD TO SAY.

I guess white straight males really have no excuses for failing at life any more. That must be really difficult.

For white straight males at the bottom of the socioeconomic spectrum, it must be very difficult to admit privilege because it means they couldn't beat the system even when given an intrinsic advantage over everybody else.

Which all goes to explain why it is you keep getting bans and threats of being perma'd (as you were from P), and are consistently wrong about most things.

You have abject reasoning ability and are a walking information-free zone (as you've as good as admitted by saying you don't read books).

Being chronically incapable of ever formulating your own ideas (except in the recent risible "attractive women get more attention" spew that was rightly derided and deleted), your main act here for a while has consisted entirely of sucking up to and ripping off fascisto-turds like TS and Trump.

You can't spell 'restaurant' and don't know the difference between 'effect' and 'affect'. You've proved yourself here many times to be a very stupid person.

Just looking for clarification that this is, in fact the rule. That you can discuss content published on Breitbart, quote it, whatever. Just so long as you don't actually link to it? Do any other websites get the same treatment, where people can discuss material and quote from stuff published on the site but actual links are banned?

Seems crazy man. Obviously you two mods won't actually explain the rationale behind this, just want to make sure I'm interpreting this convoluted and Byzantine jungle of rules correctly.

Yeah, at this rate who won't you be able to be thoroughly despicable about?

At least in alpha I've seen posters get snap perma-banned for linking to hate sites, assume that's the case for most other subforums. ofc this is chezzland, so who knows what the rules are.

Being in the minority or majority is not a deciding factor. Sexism is real and it's really not such a big deal to discuss related political issues without being offensive to women as a group. If it's just about insulting each other then we can do so easily enough with tiny bit of effort.

Quit your whining, squeaker.

Right. But they'd get the same treatment if they started quoting material from the hate site without linking to it. If a site is so bad that linking to it gets you snap permaed, then posting and discussing content from that site without linking is obviously forbidden as well. I'm trying to wrap my head around the rule in this forum which seems to be, yes, of course you can discuss stuff published on Breitbart. Yes, of course you can quote passages of Breitbart articles. Linking to that same Breitbart article is of course forbidden. Simple!

If telling yourself these things help you sleep at night, more powerful to you. We all know the truth though, little buddy.

Just treat Breitbart like any other Neo-Nazi website. I don't get how this is hard.

But you got to be doing something right if you are pissing everyone off....

as far as i can tell, everyone other than straight white and asian men are a protected group. its your rules and your forum, so please expand on that list if you can

nobody? thought so

also if you are going to monitor and censor a language, you should be able to distinguish these differences. if you can't, thats fine, nobody expects a forum mod to answer every single question or know everything. you should probably engage in conversation about your beliefs, knowledge, and philosophy that relates to how you moderate though

The rich, the middle class, atheists, arsenal supporters, mods, politicians, celebrities, christians, men, adults, ...

Atheists in the US are one of the most hated and distrusted groups. Not that i think they shoudl get any protection. Just saying.

Pointing out things that are true is not discrimination against you.

i realize this is your attempt at humor but it is a rule and how you moderate. it should be up for discussion. a bunch of groups you just listed contain protected groups, therefore aren't

you should actually try to work through this. this is a real issue in the forum and society at the moment. people come up with overly simplistic ideas and categorize things. then they refuse to have an open and honest discussion about what they believe. thats a recipe for ignorance to prosper

this is true. studies show that a muslim has a better chance at getting elected in the USA than an atheist. just think about that. who's being prejudged?

You can see a lot of Andrew dice clay in wil

All of them aren't protected groups. Even the one that was an attempt at humour.

pretty sure this is a misconception but can you explain what you mean better.