Your black and white view of this is exhausting. There is obviously a difference between making assumptions about a population based on inherent qualities, and making assumptions about a group of people based on all making the same decision. It is not stereotyping to assume that someone posting in a Donald Trump fan group is a fan of Donald Trump.

Now, I certainly wouldn’t approve of infringing on anyone’s actual first amendment rights on this kind of basis, but again, we’re talking about completely private spaces here with absolutely no pretense of free speech. People do also have every right to create whatever exclusionary communities that they want.

So, say I was anti-Trump and I posted there… I would still be misunderstood as an “other” and labeled, banned, etc. Then have to appeal a ban for a judgement incorrectly pre-passed on me.

This is extra weird to me. Isn’t this already the exact scenario you’re claiming? The one that started the whole discussion? You’ve been claiming to be centrist and that you only posted there once, but now you’re throwing it out like it’s some hypothetical? I’ve been trying to assume the best here but it’s getting increasingly difficult to believe you’re anything but a bad actor trying to stir people up.

You are inadvertently supporting the same bases of bias that racial segregation came form.

No, sorry, but that’s pretty dumb. There’s nothing wrong with creating a conversation space that excludes people who make certain choices. That’s the fundamental difference here. You weren’t born into the wrong subreddit, you chose to post there. And a hell of a lot of people that choose to post there aggressively harass anyone questioning law enforcement. It’s a nice way to weed out people who have no interest in good faith contributions, and there’s an easy way to get unbanned for cases just like yours.

That is not in any way the same ‘base of bias’ as excluding people based on their race, gender, nationality, or sexual preferences.

Your entitlement is incredible.

Of course it isn’t immoral to have private discussion groups. That’s an absurd idea. Subreddits are private conversation spaces, not a public service, you aren’t owed access to any of them. Do you have the same emotional reaction to invite only subreddits?

Have you stopped to consider for a moment why that filter might have been established?

If you had responded to the ban like an adult and simply pointed that out in a polite way, I’d wager they would happily drop the ban. It’s an automated process, and they included a helpful link for how to flag a false positive.

But instead you just threw a tantrum and acted like an ass. I would have muted you too.

Just a heads up, catbox.moe is starting to get blocked by some major ISPs. Verizon is one I’ve run into, catbox links won’t load if I’m using the mobile network.

deleted by creator

Thanks for clarifying, now please refer to the poster’s original statement:

AI doesn’t grok anything. It doesn’t have any capability of understanding at all. It’s a Markov chain on steroids.

Allowing anyone to just sell whatever chemical they come up with without first showing that it’s safe would be insanely irresponsible.

Why would you need a male/female USB?

This device is basically just a really short charging/data cable. I don’t understand what’s so confusing about it. It’s functionally identical to using the standard charging cable, just with the devices closer together.

The Lego company, since around 1980. It’s been the official name since their creation.

There’s nothing to remember here, the dude just didn’t know what they were called as a kid. They’ve been minifigs since their creation in the late 70s.

Yeah, this one definitely deserves to be unpopular. They’ve always been minifigs, they’ll always be minifigs, you don’t mess with perfection.

The majority of the current ‘democrat’ party in the US are Neoliberals. Yeah it’s a right wing ideology, that’s the whole point of recognizing that even the ‘left wing’ here are still primarily conservatives.

Are you seriously complaining about requiring a signature? Why should weed paraphernalia be treated any differently to tobacco?

I think if someone looks good in photos but not on video, they probably just have a skilled photographer.

That’s nice. Also completely pointless since you can’t seem to grasp a simple concept.

I don’t fucking care.

If you don’t want to be confused for a pedo, stop calling women ‘girls’ when searching for porn. It’s not the 90s anymore. This is only going to be more common as the fight against AI CSM escalates.

Nothing mistaken, I just don’t give a rats ass. Using a 20 year old, wildly exploitative porn franchise that went bankrupt after its founder was accused of creating child porn is not exactly a convincing argument that ‘girls’ is a useful term to find porn of adult women.

Obviously it’s often used colloquially for women. That doesn’t change what it literally means. What I’m trying to point out here is that if you’re looking for porn, don’t call women ‘girls’, because it sounds like you’re looking for children. It’s pretty fucking simple.

Ironically calling a group of geriatrics ‘girls’ doesn’t change the meaning. It’s a joke that apparently went over your head.

It’s not an offense, it’s a word for children. Which makes it a very poor choice when searching for explicit content unless you’re looking for CSM.