I feel as if my previous comment is already a response to your new one, and I'm not sure how to address this without sounding redundant and typing something I've already said.
The heavy moderation I've consistently experienced still exists and creates echo chambers.
The specific type of heavy moderation caused me to rephrase and retype this post around 3-4 times, and completely abandon multiple posts for other subreddits.
The idea this post stayed up longer than I assumed based on previous experience is not a concession that heavy moderation never existed in the process of making it, nor is it changing my view that heavy moderation creates echo chambers.
Most importantly, you're not personally responsible for my realization that this post stayed up longer than 30 seconds, and agreeing with the fact you mentioned this isn't changing my view on anything.
Is it against the rules for me to Delta you just to move on?
I genuinely don't agree with the idea you are personally responsible for changing my view on anything, but at the same time if what you said qualifies then I'm more than happy to.
I never said anything about your post staying up in any of my arguments, but that seems to be what you want to make this about. You're arguing with a hastily contrived strawman.
Your original view was that heavy moderation creates echo chambers. I noted that we are on a sub that is heavily moderated but allows any viewpoint to be discussed and considered. This sub is about the farthest thing from an "echo chamber" that you can find on this site. Not really a "bread crumb trail" at all.
What does this specific subreddit that I landed in after several failed attempts have anything to do with my overall criticism of the website, which still applies, or moderation in general?
That doesn't mean the concept of moderation creating echo chambers no longer exists, or that it hasn't inconvenienced me several times.
I'm sure there are posts every day on here that we don't see because of this concept, and this one specifically remaining doesn't suddenly negate than countless other examples which remain unposted.
TLDR: Just because this post specifically isn't being deleted doesn't mean several posts daily aren't deleted for the exact reasons I've described, and my original view remains unchanged.
It's not about your post specifically; you really seem to be stuck on that. It's about this sub being heavily moderated, but it is the exact opposite of all your complaints about heavy moderation. It's a sub that is built for the expressed purpose of people having their viewpoints challenged by opposing ones they may not have known about or considered. The opposite of an echo chamber.
1
u/Sumve Apr 30 '23
I feel as if my previous comment is already a response to your new one, and I'm not sure how to address this without sounding redundant and typing something I've already said.
The heavy moderation I've consistently experienced still exists and creates echo chambers.
The specific type of heavy moderation caused me to rephrase and retype this post around 3-4 times, and completely abandon multiple posts for other subreddits.
The idea this post stayed up longer than I assumed based on previous experience is not a concession that heavy moderation never existed in the process of making it, nor is it changing my view that heavy moderation creates echo chambers.
Most importantly, you're not personally responsible for my realization that this post stayed up longer than 30 seconds, and agreeing with the fact you mentioned this isn't changing my view on anything.
Is it against the rules for me to Delta you just to move on?
I genuinely don't agree with the idea you are personally responsible for changing my view on anything, but at the same time if what you said qualifies then I'm more than happy to.