I'm hoping it gets better. The point isn't to kill it, it's to heal it. I think the first step is to stop the whole "if you disagree with me then you need to leave" mentality. I'd rather be friends and have a conversation than be silenced.

Don't be surprised if you're account also gets suspended. I've been suspended, twice, for messaging the mods and asking them to do what their rules and reddit's rules say they should do. They'd just mute me, so I'd wait then politely message again. This went on for weeks then I was suspended for three days. Then there was the time I asked /r/WorldNews to enforce their rules. It was maybe two total messages from me. Then 24 hours later my account is suspended, this time for a week. The mods of these leftist havens are in bed with the admins. They simply gesture and bam, you're suspended. You're not allowed to question, you aren't allowed to ask them to do what they say they're going to do. Wrongthink is being silenced.

>so why go Because ignoring it makes me complicit.

You gotta make sure there's no wrongthink. That's for sure. Can't have someone coming to their own conclusions. I mean, if you let them do that they might see what a racist ass he is and that the whole narrative /r/news is trying to push is complete bull shit.

Tbh I have no clue what that sub was about. Just noticed some subs got banned yesterday and saw some people talking about it so I figured I'd post it.

Yep. And the SJW pandering means it wins an award because actual quality is no longer relevant. It's all about who's the biggest SJW. Why do you think PewDiePie is never in YouTube rewind anymore, despite being the biggest YouTuber in the world? Not to mention YouTube rewind itself. Yep, fuck 2019.

I don't know the method to their madness. I just know there are 2000 censored and looking over them, many are clearly being pulled because of an agenda. Maybe they're hoping that less comments is better? Don't know.

They've censored almost 2000 of the 14,000 comments. Incredible.

The assumption is that this sub is a community devoted to ending of all censorship, not specifically the censorship on Reddit.

Thank you! I definitely judge people too quickly. We all do. We're human and sometimes humans are bad. Right now I'm just frustrated with how it's being treated on Reddit. It feels like people are treating it like it's a ticket to being super irresponsible. See my failed /r/Unpopularopinions thread if you want to see my full hot take.

Haha you're good my dude. It's Monday. Everyone is pretty rough this morning I'd imagine. Take it easy.

(☞ﾟヮﾟ)☞ This one. (☞ﾟヮﾟ)☞

1. This wasn't me. This image is from another user who posted it on another subreddit. I felt it was appropriate for this sub. 2. You're the third person so far, ever, to get on me about my username. I've explained the username to the two previous people who, hopefully, walked away feeling silly that they'd so quickly judged a person so harshly based solely on a username. When I was in high school, around 2005, I started playing my first ever online game, Battlefield 2142. My friend that got me in to it, Paul, had a username of ThorsChariot. Being the clever teenager I was, I thought I'd go along with the theme. I didn't know anything about Thor but the first name I found when I looked him up was Loki. It said something about mischief and, again, being the clever teenager I was, I thought "Yeah, I'm pretty mischievous." (I wasn't. I was a straight A boy scout.) So I picked Loki as the handle, and it's been that way ever since. Then the country got a new president and we devolved in to this insane polarization and race fighting and now I get people like you insinuating I'm a white supremacist because in high school I couldn't think for myself so just followed my friend's name when I made mine.

The same way they can go crazy for the children when it's a school shooting but think that an abortion at 8 months is totally hip.

True. Unless we had a sort of upvote downvote system that would ensure only posts that the people wanted to see would make it to the front page. That way if people didn't want to see a ton of China posts they could just downvote them. Just trying to come up with some ideas here.

I'm a mod on a subreddit dedicated to pointing out the censorship that's rampant on Reddit. I see it every day. I'm not just finding out about it. How I wish I were though. Imagine a world where the censorship was so infrequent that I was only just now discovering it.

Yep. And it's driving a wedge between the two parties.

That is correct now. It was not the case when this thread was created. This thread's creation, along with the rest of the good people of Reddit pointing out the censorship and narrative pushing, helped get that thread reopened and an actual answer.

Copy the URL of the comments threads for any of those censored threads. Replace the "r" in "reddit.com" with a "c" so the URL is "ceddit.com" Let that load until the Pac-Man in the top left is no longer there, then scroll now and look at all the censored comments.

Every comment showing the full video and explaining away the BS fake news narrative is downvoted to hell in that thread too. They *want* it to look a certain way. They don't want reality. It's disgusting. Gotta push that agenda.

It was locked when I posted this thread. It's still locked. That's censorship.

Guess they got worried people would start realizing that the point isn't to actually interview people and have good journalism, but instead be a racist piece of shit. Best part is, when the guy tells her "I can't have 'white privilege,' I'm black" she immediately says she was "given wrong information." So you're told someone is white and you immediately judge them based on that? Don't we fire journalists for being super racist? Hmmmmmmm.....

We disagreed on something but we didn't get in to a slap fight over it! Hurray for us not being shitty on the internet!

Not gonna downvote you. Yes, there are posts on their that are rule breaking. But the majority are not. The majority are not what the mods want, but they are also not breaking any rules.

Yes! Yes! That's the exact sub I'm talking about.

Eh. My guess is anyone interested in this sub is interested in censorship, not just on Reddit but all over. Obviously it wasn't received well, but you don't get upvotes on every post. Happy Cake Day friend!

I'm sure that's only coincidence. Any conclusions you may draw from it would most certainly be incorrect.

Deleted comments: >Lol this guy is basically 75% of the liberals I've ever met. It's disturbing. and >Real quick before the mods lock this thread, I gotta say >Bill Clinton is a rapist >INFOWARS.COM and >This is where antiracism leads. This kid's mind is melting down because he thinks he has to show the poor poc that he is an ally at any cost. Meanwhile the black guy wants nicotine only. He thinks the ginger is corny and will never respect him. and >I wish my husband and I (5 tours in Iraq with the USMC husband) lived local so we could stop shopping there. IDGAF if you agree with it or not this free country allows liberal cry babies like you to be offended guess what it also allows red blooded Americans like me to offend so get over your self STFU and ring him out as your job entails. Don't want to do your job someone else out there will... and >"FUCK OFF GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE N***** YOU RACIST FUCK" >anyone else catch that? and >Damn that scream reminds me of a little kid not getting his way knowing he cant do anything about it. and >When does the soy drinking mod lock up the third thread of the day. lmao Was this you in the vape store mod? Are you having a bad day?

How incredibly shocking.../s

Hey /u/Sara_Solo. Thanks for the research!

They so badly want to ram this shit down our throats that they're will to pretend this kind of behavior is ok as long as it means furthering their cause.

I get removing stuff like "You should fucking kill yourself you disgusting fuck" but why does this get removed? >I worked with a trans man (or is it woman?). She was like 6'5" and I had known her as a man for the first couple years we worked together. She was okay with "dude", which is apparently gender neutral from what I could find. But I would occasionally slip up and say man or something similar and she would give me a weird look...it's not that simple to reprogram my brain. Really? What a bunch of imbeciles.

It sure makes for a good excuse to ban people you don't like.

Yep. It's just an advertisement and should be removed. Reddit is for true organic content.

They want to pretend it isn't bias and fee fees.

Yep. And people eat it up. Ask anyone if they like being taken advantage of and they'll say no. But try and show them how gullible they're being by upvoting that shit and all you'll get is anger. Amazing.

Yyyyep. That's no accident there.

That's no reason to give up. We'll continue to record the censorship so that it does not go unnoticed. We'll have a record of each instance we find. It's all we can do, for now.

Check out what's on /r/WorldNews now with over a thousand upvotes: Sweden: Women-only music festival falls foul of discrimination laws | A music festival billed as being “male-free” has been found guilty of discrimination by Sweden’s Discrimination Ombudsman (DO). https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/a7y96n/sweden_womenonly_music_festival_falls_foul_of/ So it was a misleading title when I posted it, but not when someone else posted it??? I've commented on the post pointing out the ridiculousness of the situation: https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/a7y96n/slug/ec7a6ms I'm predicting they remove my post, then when I ask why, if they even answer, they make up a rule. I'm gonna go with "no meta posts" as their made up rule. Let's see! Edit: My comment has suspiciously been removed without any notification to me as to the fact that it was removed or the reason behind the removal. Wow...I'm so shocked...

That's a super pertinent question. I attempted to ask them, but they're going with the "put fingers in ears and say Lalalalala" approach. Also, I was not banned. Just suspended for a week once already for asking questions. And now this time I've been muted. Who knows, maybe I'll get suspended again. Last time it was a day or two of nothing before the suspension, so there's still a chance!

According to the article, it's possible this may not be censorship, but we'll only know once there's an actual official statement. >Reached by PJ Media, Professor Starr (who teaches at the University of Michigan) suggested her article may not have been censored, but rather, that USC stopped paying for access to the particular article. However, USC officials did not give that as a response when I asked about censorship of the article, and have yet to provide any further explanation.

The headline was: >7-year-old migrant girl taken into Border Patrol custody dies of dehydration, exhaustion Doesn't that make it seem like the border patrol agents starved a 7 year old girl? Misleading headlines is against the rules on most subs, but when it pushes the agenda that the /r/politics mods want to push, it's ok to ignore the rule. Here's the comment that the mods censored away since it, you know, may have clued people in to the fact that the headline is super misleading: >>According to CBP records, the girl and her father were taken into custody at around 10 p.m. on Dec. 6 south of Lordsburg, N.M., as part of a group of 163 people who approached U.S. agents to turn themselves in. >>More than eight hours later, the child began having seizures at 6:25 a.m., CBP records show. Emergency responders who arrived soon after measured her body temperature at 105.7 degrees, and according to a statement from CBP, she “reportedly had not eaten or consumed water for several days.” Yep, they censored a comment that was 100% a quote of the article itself. Disgusting. A 7 year old girl died but if they can push an agenda they're more than happy to use a poor 7 year old girl to do it. Here are some other comments that apparently didn't follow the agenda: >“We call for a rigorous investigation into how this tragedy happened and serious reforms to prevent future deaths” >How about we stop blaming border control and start blaming that selfish father for forcing his sick child to cross the border illegally. He was dehydrating his kid before they even got into custody, then the kid dies. It’s tragic, but is it not mostly the father’s fault? I think medical attention should have been provided, but the border controls job is to organize and deport these people. The father knew what he was getting into, and he killed his kid in the process. Think about it, would you put your kid through this? Would you dehydrate them, just to try an illegally come to America, possibly to be deported back to where you came from? It’s hard work for nothing. Instead of doing this he should be staying home taking care of his family, and trying to get a job. His daughter would be alive. ... >That is inhumane af. >We soldiers gave food an water to Iraqi detainees we captured right after they fucking shot at us. >Goddamnit. ... >This girl died after just 8 hours in CBP custody, that means her father did not ensure she had water while he force marched her across the fucking desert and you dont find him at fault? Not even one bit? >God you people are so thick and blinded by politics you cant even let yourself come to very basic logical conclusions. There's plenty more that was censored away in the thread. I'm at work so can't really go grab it all. The thread takes a while to load since there are so many comments. BTW I accidentally posted this to /r/politics first. I'm on my phone so it's annoying to compile all this. Whoops. It should come as no surprise though that I have been banned from /r/politics http://magaimg.net/img/6v6w.jpg

>If reddit was a publicly owned forum, you would be right. But as a business, they have the right and obligation to the advertisers to limit what is perceived as offensive. We aren't saying they *can't* do what they're doing, we're saying that what they're doing is wrong and will only serve to deceive people. In a perfect world, everyone would be as outraged as us. No one should be ok with their decisions being made for them to this degree. >Nothing is stopping someone from deciding to see search it out and see it The Reddit admins are indeed doing just this. The only way you'll see /r/DebateAltRight now is by actively seeking it out. But the entire site is designed around a system of voting up what you want to see and people seeing that stuff the most. The admins have no made it so that no matter how many upvotes a post on /r/DebateAltRight may get, it will be invisible unless you specifically seek out the subreddit. That goes against Reddit's entire design. It's censorship. It's the admins specifically hiding away something so people don't see it. That is censorship.

>The freedom of speech allows you to say whatever you want, but you can't force others to listen to what you want to say. I don't advocate forcing anyone to follow your belief. I do advocate everyone having the ability to believe what you believe by your own decision, not by the admins'. >And the Quarantine isn't preventing these people from conversing with one another. It's preventing people from seeing something and being able to decide whether or not they agree with that. They won't be allowed to take a side on it. This website has surpassed Google now in popularity. Reddit has become an incredibly important player in how the world thinks and stances the world takes. I mean they're talking about Russians using T_D to win Trump the White House. It's incredibly important that people be allowed to see what they want and decide for themselves to hide something away. >The "Alt right" isn't going to accomplish anything besides fueling more hate into the hearts of both sides. Then let them. Let people say what they want to say. Reddit already gives its users all the tools they'll ever need to hide away anything they don't want to see. The admins' censoring away /r/DebateAltRight is an open admission that they disagree with that subreddit's opinions and they're willing to use their positions to ensure no one else gets to hear that opinion, lest they, heaven forbid, agree.

This subreddit isn't about judging what was and wasn't "cancerous." It's about pointing out that the users should be able to make that call themselves. We don't think the admins should be deciding for us what we want to see and don't want to see. It sounds like you're a fan of those decisions being made for you...so you probably won't agree with our mission.

Unless Reddit versions their tables in which case you're merely creating a new version 0 of the row that has your comment and upping the version of the other rows, meaning your comments are always there in the db...

I've been able to track down real footage of the /r/news mods seeing your post: https://media3.giphy.com/media/vk7VesvyZEwuI/giphy.gif

Huh? No, anyone can post here. What makes you think there would be a restriction?

Because then the censorship wins. It sucks. Hard. I've been worked up all day because of it. I just want the censorship to end. They can have a sub where they only allow their own agenda. But say that. Stop pretending.

From the article: >The new report, which was submitted to the Homeland Security Department, which supported the research, said there’s mixed evidence on violence being a factor, but said the evidence on the pulls is more clear.

Never said it was. It was submitted to the Department of Homeland Security and they accepted and supported it.

**Please see my edits at the bottom of this comment for my dialog with the mods and subsequent muting. Censorship at its finest** I've messaged the mods with the following: This post was removed with a cited reason of "opinion/analysis." https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/a1ja7u/caravan_mostly_standard_illegal_immigrants_not/ The article the post links to is not an opinion or analysis at all. I even pointed out in my comments how the article was not opinion but rather is based specifically on an in depth study that was even submitted to the Department of Homeland Security who accepted and supported the study. Here is my comment remarking on the article not being opinion: *I looked because it's obviously not an opinion piece since it's all based on the study, but I can't find the exact study. Still looking.* *From the article:* >The academics used myriad yardsticks to reach their conclusions, including surveys of how people perceive violence in their countries, polling of migrants and their motivations, and employment conditions. >They asked questions about the cost-benefit analysis migrants are likely making about moving to a safer place within their own country, moving to Mexico, or moving to the U.S. They concluded that few people who decide to leave their home country in Central America will move to Mexico, because the average migrant only sees a 10 percent wage increase. Please reinstate this post. It isn't an opinion piece. It's based off a real study using myriad methods to reach a conclusion. Reading the article makes that very clear. My post links to an article that is showing a study that was done and conclusions from that study, including what was done to carry out the study. The current top post for this week on /r/WorldNews is a post comparing the situation at the US/Mexican border to that of the Holocaust. https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/a0yeil/auschwitz_museum_on_latin_american_migration_its/ So that isn't "opinion/analysis" but my article I posted which cites a real study with real science and conclusions from that study somehow is? Please reinstate my post. Thank you. EDIT: I received the following response from the mods: *The author is making an inference based on a study as to the composition of a migrant caravan. That’s analysis by the author.* I replied: The study concludes that. It isn't an inference by the author. It's a conclusion from the study itself. Literally the first sentence of the article: >The Central Americans surging into the U.S. and claiming asylum look a lot more like regular illegal immigrants, eager for better jobs or to reunite with families, than traditional refugees fleeing persecution or violence back home, **according to a new report** Wednesday that challenges conventional wisdom on the migrants’ motives. It isn't the author inferring anything. There was an entire study. The study had conclusions. The article states the study's conclusion. Please reinstate the post. It is not an opinion. EDIT2: The mods replied: *The discussion of the research does not suggest it is an analysis of the caravan’s composition, just the composition of asylum seekers in general from these countries.* *Lest you see this as an invitation to an exhaustive back and forth, we consider this matter addressed. Please do not message us further requesting reinstatement of this post.* I replied: The discussion of the research does not suggest it is an analysis of the caravan’s composition, just the composition of asylum seekers in general from these countries. The first sentence of the article: >The Central Americans surging into the U.S. and claiming asylum look a lot more like regular illegal immigrants, eager for better jobs or to reunite with families, than traditional refugees fleeing persecution or violence back home, according to a new report Wednesday that challenges conventional wisdom on the migrants’ motives. The first sentence clearly states that the report refers to "The Central Americans surging into the U.S." That's the Caravan. >Lest you see this as an invitation to an exhaustive back and forth, we consider this matter addressed. Please do not message us further requesting reinstatement of this post. Nope, I see this as you censoring any articles that go against the narrative that /r/WorldNews is attempting to push. You aren't interested in any rules when the article trashes the United States President. Here are a few examples to demonstrate this claim: Your top post this week with over 100,000 upvotes is an opinion piece comparing the migrant crisis to the Holocaust. https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/a0yeil/auschwitz_museum_on_latin_american_migration_its/ Another popular post from this week links to an article with the following in it: Washington Post publisher Fred Ryan condemned the president's comments, calling them cover for "tyrants" around the globe. "A clear and dangerous message has been sent to tyrants around the world: Flash enough money in front of the president of the United States, and you can literally get away with murder," Ryan wrote. "President Trump whitewashed the Saudi government’s brutal murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi," he continued. https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/9zor5u/turkey_accuses_trump_of_turning_blind_eye_to/ Doesn't that feel like the author is selecting statements just to forward an opinion against Trump? Sure feels like way to me. Here's another super popular post from this past week alleging Manafort held secret talks with Julian Assange. The author states the following: But the last apparent meeting is likely to come under scrutiny and could interest Robert Mueller, the special prosecutor who is investigating alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. That's clearly the author drawing their own conclusions. It's complete opinion. Please explain to me how these examples of clear opinion were allowed to stay up, while my article which is simply documenting conclusions from a scientific study that is explained in the article is somehow opinion. Explain why it feels like any post which is negative towards Trump gets a free pass, while my post which doesn't follow the narrative of /r/WorldNews gets censored away? EDIT3: They replied with: *Yes, the first sentence is an author’s interpretation of the report. The report itself is not characterized as describing the caravan. That’s opinion/analysis.* *We will not be responding to your inquiries in the future as you’ve evidenced repeatedly in prior messages that they are not made in good faith. Please don’t contact us again.* And then they muted me. So they censor the wrongthink, they ignore the logic, they censor any arguments, and there are no consequences.

Had a friend in Freshman year of high school who was Thor's Chariot so I became Loki's Servant then at some point I became Loki. There's a promotion process.

One post doesn't mean they've turned a complete 180, but in the interest of fairness I think it's important to document when they do get something right.

Definitely some comments that should have been deleted, but *many* more that are people saying "I don't 100% agree with OP but I definitely don't think OP should have received such a message." Nope. Either you're 100% on board or you're censored. I guess medical fact must be removed? >Its perfectly fine to believe what you want. You believe a clinical mental illness is not an issue an removing parts helps fix it. An I disagree so guess what learn to agree to disagree. How does this get removed? >I disagree with the nature of the transgender movement heavily but this guy has no fucking reason to be such an fucking jerk. We lose everything if we abandon our own decency and common respect to people, including those we disagree with. I presume this guy who messaged you was probably Christian, but he would do well to remember the words "Love thine enemy" and "Treat thy neighbors as thyself." Compassion is the greatest weapon one can use to make someone see from your point of view, not mindless rage and bullying. Again, same here. You either are on board all the way or you get silenced. >i dont care if i will get downvoted because of my opinion but he got some points. they way he tells it is disrespectful but i struggle to find a single thing to argue about... This person is rather level headed, but, alas, censored. >Only Men or Female in this world. You can change your outside as much as you want, can't change your DNA. It is a mental illness. Its your life you do what you want, just stop trying to shove it down our throats to accept that type of illness as normal. I don't agree with the person telling you to end your life over it. This got censored away too: >Now while I’m a bit iffy on the whole “Trans” movement myself, telling someone whose GENUINELY trying to transition to kill themselves is a tad (about thiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiis much) fucked Definitely more on that thread. Check out the link.

Eyyyyy. I've been Loki since 2004.

Huh?

/r/WorldNews shows up on this subreddit *quite* often due to their repeated censorship for the sake of the narrative. While this post is not censorship, I feel it's important to document their steps forward in correcting this behavior. Here is the message I sent to them, and their response: This comment was removed. *https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/9zd4mg/donald_trump_has_once_again_confused_the_weather/ea8avy8/* *I scoured the sidebar and confirmed it breaks no rules. What is breaking rules is the post itself which strangely was not removed.* *Could you please let me know why the comment was removed despite not breaking any rules, and how the post itself remains up despite clearly violating the subreddit's rules.* And their reply: *The post has been removed. Your comment has been approved, every once in a while automod messes up.*

I have to stop. The admins have directly said that by expecting the rules to be followed and asking a moderator to follow them is considered harassment. You don't have to follow the rules if you're agenda aligns with those that make the rules. But if you do follow the rules then you may still be punished if your agenda does not align.

But I'm not going to break the rules. I refuse. I'll do everything I can that the rules allow, and I'll document every time shit like this happens.

And no mechanism for users to effectively alert anyone of this nonsense and get any sort of dialog or transparency on what's being done to fix the issue.

/r/CringeAnarchy. Reddit has censored the entire subreddit though so you have to go through a browser while signed in to your account and confirm you don't have senstivie fee fees. Then you have to directly go to the subreddit on your app and it should let you in.

It's been that way forever. /r/politics, /r/WorldNews, /r/News. Even /r/OutOfTheLoop is going that way lately.

Here's a post made by one of the people who was banned for saying true things on that thread. https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateAltRight/comments/9tlz7q/i_just_got_banned_from_a_major_sub_for_pointing/

How about you just appreciate my existence and not question it.

Yes. And the fact that they'll only allow talk of it when it furthers their narrative only makes that more obvious.

There were definitely comments that should have been removed for that very reason. Those aren't the ones I'm talking about.

So just to be clear...if she had just said "No, I'm dressing as Chun Li, not as a Chinese woman" then all these people would be totally cool? You reallllly think that's how it would go? Really?

‘It’s just a dress’: Teen’s Chinese prom attire stirs cultural appropriation debate https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/05/01/its-just-a-dress-teens-chinese-prom-attire-stirs-cultural-appropriation-debate/ >“My culture is NOT your …. prom dress,” a man named Jeremy Lam tweeted days later, sharing the photos she posted.

You aren't allowed to say someone is in the wrong with the cultural appropriation costume BS sometimes? I guess? Seems very strange...or maybe that the whole thing is completely made up and doesn't actually follow any sort of logic.

Bad bot.

I'm truly sorry that you are not seeing the content you feel is appropriate for the subreddit. If the majority of subscribers don't believe this is the content they want to see either, then we'll look in to it. But I feel that the content is appropriate for the subreddit since most people are coming here to observe the ongoing censorship of the internet in general, not just what's happening on Reddit. I feel like another subreddit solely about non-reddit censorship would be pretty redundant. I find myself having the same reaction you're having to content on other subs such as /r/WorldNews allowing US news/politics/opinion/analysis as long as it's shitting on Trump. But that sub has specific rules against that sort of post, so my complaints are based solely on their hypocrisy in allowing their rules to be broken to further a narrative. If we had a strict "only censorship from Reddit" rule then I'd definitely agree with you. I want you to know that I'm happy you're letting us know that you don't feel this sort of content is appropriate. Like I said, I find myself in your position a lot and every single time the mods make it super clear that they're pushing a narrative, they don't give a shit about their rules, and they definitely don't give a shit about me. Please know that I definitely do not feel that way about you and about your opinion. :-)

>It’s not censorship to not let someone use your platform for ignorance and hatred. You don’t have a right to use things that belong to others especially for stupid shit Here's the definition of censorship: >the suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security. It doesn't matter if you or anyone else feel its "ignorance and hatred." That's what's so great about censorship, it isn't about opinion. This entire subreddit simply observes and documents the censorship. Whether we agree or disagree with what's being censored is irrelevant.