I got Geo-libertarianism, which is surprisingly accurate.

I would rather have a totalitarian government than an anarchist one.

government

anarchist

:rage-cry:

We’re all “the guy”

red Mars

I just finished reading Red Mars by Kim Stanley Robinson recently and it’s one of the best sci-fi books I’ve encountered. Without giving away too much of the plot, Martian independence is a primary story line. Highly recommended.

I personally think what they said was pretty fucked and am okay with them being banned

What you personally think doesn’t matter. We need consistent application of rules, not personal feelings, dictating punishment.

but it’s not good for someone to see a truly fucked comment persecuting their religious beliefs, identity, race, what have you.

I don’t understand why removing the comment isn’t enough? I guess I don’t understand what banning the user accomplishes versus just removing the comment.

Do you have a thread or something I can post an apology in?

You could make one in c/userunion and @ me in it. You could have apologized in this thread, but it’s really old now.

I don’t understand why removing the comment isn’t enough? A user being Islamophobic is obviously a reason to ban someone (I don’t think Amorphous was being Islamophobic), but if someone says something Islamophobic out of ignorance I guess I don’t understand what banning the user accomplishes versus just removing the comment.

They made the point that if it were transphobic it wouldn’t be tolerated

Everything above applies the same for transphobic statements, imo. I’ve personally had more encounters on this site where someone says something transphobic and they are corrected and learn from the experience than ones where the user is actually malicious.

Well I appreciate that.

I wish there were a better way to handle situations like mine where the community clearly doesn’t feel the ban was necessary. I don’t know what the solution is, but it’s disappointing from my perspective.

it was obvious they were an islamophobe

If you truly think this person is an Islamophobe (which I don’t, personally, even if I disagree strongly with their views) then they should have been banned outright. You said they were banned for what they said in mod chat, but you could have just removed them from mod chat and that problem would be immediately solved. You’re confusing story is only making it seem more likely that this ban was done for personal reasons, and not based simply on enforcement of the rules of the site.

Just imagine it was someone with a transphobic position. They wouldve been banned from the start without even a moment to explain themselves.

I think this has proven to be a problem as well. Assumptions are sometimes being made about the views of Chapos based on way too little information, such as downvote patterns and bad takes. There’s a difference between being Islamophobic and making an Islamophobic take. They’re both problems, but they’re very different problems that deserve different solutions.

For what it’s worth, having encountered plenty of anti-religious anarchists, I’ve found that the best way to convince these people is to show them that they already don’t hate religion, they hate the institutions of religion. Almost every anti-religion leftist I’ve encountered has no problem with “personal spirituality”, only with “organized religion”. I think promoting the idea of liberating, democratizing, and/or removing the hierarchies within religions is a really easy way to convince our confused comrades to change their views, or at least their rhetoric. Plus Christian Anarchists are just cool as hell!

I’ve been very vocal about my disapproval of how the downvote ban wave took place in the modchat.

I think it’d be good for the community to see mods have some of these discussions publicly. Seeing mods disagree with each other, especially when it’s civil, only serves to instill confidence in the mod team.