Comment by hilios
5 days ago
You're listing several examples, including /r/conservative, yet even though this subreddit is widely known (on Reddit) to be a censored echo-chamber, you do not mention this aspect. I find it hard to believe, that this would be a coincidence.
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;)
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.
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.
2 replies →
That's a very weak argument in my opinion.
How does the moderation in /r/conservatives, a subreddit for conservatives to discuss "from a distinctly conservative point of view", concern a liberal like yourself in any way?
This isn't a subreddit you need to participate in. I think it's more relevant how default subreddits or country subreddits are moderated in a similar way.
It concerns me insofar as the comment I was responding to, mentioned that participation in /r/conservative got him banned in another subreddit, while failing to mention the nature of /r/conservative as a heavily censored echo chamber.
Because the rest of reddit is a echo chamber of opposing views. How is that not self evident?
The /r/conservative mods are pushing far-right and conspiracy theory positions, not textbook conservative ideology.
Even actual conservatives don’t like it. It’s like a propaganda operation where only approved think is allowed.