[LaurensBER]

From the HN guidelines:

> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith

Let's aim to keep HN better and more pleasant to use than Reddit;)

[hilios]

I did explain my reasoning. You coincidentally not mentioning /r/conservatives censorship practices, simply doesn't appear plausible, given the context of your comment and demonstrated knowledge of reddit moderating practices.

[LaurensBER]

I disagree with your assessment, if I remember correctly I posted three times on that sub.

The HN guidelines are there to improve the quality of the conversation, there's not much to further discuss so I'm going to leave it at this.

[Aurornis]

> I disagree with your assessment, if I remember correctly I posted three times on that sub.

The sub currently requires moderator approval (specific flair) to comment on most threads.

The parent commenter is correct: It is widely known as one of the most censored subs on Reddit because the mods remove comments from unapproved accounts (those without flair).

Their rules claim that some threads are open for everyone to participate in, which may have been the case in the past when you commented.

However it’s not true for any of the popular threads. They will remove comments from unflaired accounts

This is all state in their rules. It’s not speculation. The parent comment is correct.

[mlrtime]

No, they are not correct. They are comparing 1 sub (which they disagree with the whole idea of) vs most every popular sub on reddit. There is no comparison.