you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -1 points 3 months ago (9 children)

So you're just inferring that they denied the repost, but it's not actually cited anywhere. Got it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (8 children)

    What the fuck are you trying to defend?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    Good journalism, I guess? Why are you fighting so hard to defend a deliberately misleading headline...?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    Because it's accurate, not misleading. They banned that criticism, they are taking an anti-trans stance.

    Trans rights are human rights. Are you a bot? I can't imagine why else you don't care about your own rights.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    It is not accurate, and we already walked through why that's the case.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    They literally restricted a piece of valid criticism from being published.

    You want to pretend that's not the same as "banning"? I can't stop you from being wrong.

    But I can call you a shithead for supporting it. Shithead.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago* (3 children)

    They literally asked for a post that was posted to their account without approval to be removed and go through the proper approval process.

    You want to pretend that's the same as "banning" criticism? I can't stop you from being wrong.

    But I can call you a shithead for supporting deceptive journalism. Shithead.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago* (2 children)

    But they did not provide a method for reposting the criticism, they replaced it with a useless offer.

    You can call me a shithead. And I can say... "No, you."

    But we may be at the end of productivity when it comes to our conversation. I believe they banned/censored a piece of valid and potentially life-saving criticism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 child)

    But they did not provide a method for reposting the criticism

    They specifically said they submitted it for proper approval. No where does it say that was denied...

    they replaced it with a useless offer.

    You're inferring that. Were you there? Do you know what was discussed? Based on their statement, the ODPC seems to disagree with you.

    You can call me a shithead. And I can say… “No, you.”

    Or you could try actually defending your claim instead of hurling petty insults and attacking strawmen.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Or you could try actually defending your claim instead

    I did. You're making more assumptions than I am.

    Where does it say they were allowed to repost their criticism? Nowhere? Interesting. Kinda like... Kinda like they banned it.

  • source
  • parent