=========please incorporate the word rule in your post titles=========== ∆∆∆Here are the things that get you banned: -saying anything remotely iffy with a lemmygrad account -tankie behaviour -nazi behaviour -authoritarian behaviour -genocide denial -prejudice of any kind -anything else that is clearly bad
∆∆∆Things that get your post/comment removed: -anything in the banlist -posts that are so off topic/moldy that they don’t fit on 196 at all (very rare, not usually enforced) -corpoposting
Ban length varies, and is mostly based off of whether or not I think you will change your behavior. I have baned certain people for upwards of 200 days.
---------EDIT:NSFW RULES--------- NSFW Content is now fully permitted BUT it must be tagged. Any NSFW content that has not been tagged and blurred will be removed. Content warnings should also be added to the title in brackets. Example: [penis] or: [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged. Yes, even female breasts. IRL GORE IS NOT PERMITTED UNDER ANY CONDITION. 8----------------------------------------------------------- Please leave any suggested edits in the comments.
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
- 1 user online
- 3 users / day
- 3 users / week
- 3 users / month
- 1 user / 6 months
- 0 subscribers
- 2.64K Posts
- 13.9K Comments
- Modlog
Probably because banning people based purely on political ideology is kind of facist 😝
Reminds me exactly on the wise words of Sir Karl Popper about the ‘paradox of tolerance’:
“Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.—In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force;”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
Seems like a scarecrow argument to me.
Not very based.