[jasmer]

This example is not going to help your case.

The statement 'kill all men' is literally a call to violence.

Now of course (probably?) you didn't mean it as that, but it still falls well within purview of 'obviously moderated', probably immediately, by the automated mechanisms, and frankly, how could you expect anything otheriwse?

The fact that you're willing to admit your bigotry and blatant hate speech on another forum, as though somehow you're a victim, is probably an exmaple of how we tolerate trolling dirtbag bigotry, so long as it 'targets the correct side'.

My god man the lack of self awareness.

[runarberg]

Never claimed I shouldn’t have been banned (and frankly, I’m a little glad I was), just providing an anecdote that “saying things about 'men' or 'white people' does indeed fall under the same auspices” as bigots on the other political wing.

Full disclosure though, I do believe moderation should not be applied equally across political the spectrum, when one extreme goes against a protected minority, but I won’t go into further details here on HN, as it would go against the guidelines of not engaging in political battles.

[ETH_start]

>>The fact that you're willing to admit your bigotry and blatant hate speech on another forum, as though somehow you're a victim, is probably an exmaple of how we tolerate trolling dirtbag bigotry, so long as it 'targets the correct side'.

Well said, it's like a neonazi taking pride in having advocated genocide of all Jews. This is why the "protected minority" ideology, whereby how people can be treated is based on the alleged victimization of their group, is dangerous.

[TMWNN]

>This is why the "protected minority" ideology, whereby how people can be treated is based on the alleged victimization of their group, is dangerous.

I remain hopeful that US laws and regulations regarding "protected classes" will someday be successfully challenged by the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.