[jamesaguilar]

Now replace fool with dragon. Says something different again. Whoa!

Good mods can tell the difference between people who have other views and idiots. If the moderators in your community of choice can't, you should probably choose another community. But your equivocation between silencing other viewpoints and eliminating unhealthy voices is not useful.

[grourk]

I upvoted you before you added the second paragraph because I thought your joke was funny. "But your equivocation between silencing other viewpoints and eliminating unhealthy voices is not useful." Why not? I was making the point that it's often not easy to tell the difference.

[jamesaguilar]

I mean, the body of the blog post you're responding to is claiming a) that it is, and b) that even when it isn't, you can just leave a poorly modded community. In the face of that, I don't find "replace-the-word" rhetoric very compelling.

[stcredzero]

What are the factors that would make it compelling?

[jamesaguilar]

If it were shown that even in good communities with solid mods, a primary use of moderating power was to silence dissent.

For example, in this community, anti-startup articles get posted occasionally. I'd expect to see far more dead comments from people who post agreement with such articles. But I browse with showdead on, and I see no such thing.

Basically, the rhetoric needs to line up with the evidence at hand. If it doesn't, it's unsound.

[stcredzero]

Speaking of moderating power, it appears I've been down-modded for asking a clarifying question out of genuine curiosity.

[jamesaguilar]

'twasn't me. That being said, whoever downmodded you probably felt it should be obvious.

[wissler]

I can't believe you upvoted him at all, he wasn't joking he was mocking you while failing to comprehend the connection you were making. Given the subject matter here, I find that very ironic indeed.

[grourk]

Which part is ironic? That I upvoted a joke I found funny, even if was mocking me? Or that I upvoted a comment from a person who disagrees with me?

[wissler]

Neither. His remark wasn't funny, it was foolish. The subject here is about fools. Ergo the irony.

[grourk]

Oh, it wasn't funny? My mistake. Thanks for letting me know.

[wissler]

You asked why I found it ironic, I gave an honest answer. And for that you give me rude sarcasm. Classy.

[d0mine]

Who decides what is disagreement and what is idiocy.

There are many examples in real life when authorities use pejorative terms such as terrorists, criminals for people who show disagreement.

[Karunamon]

>Who decides what is disagreement and what is idiocy.

The moderators of the particular community, who else?