![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
marjaerwinI got temp-banned a couple years ago for asking some accessibility questions.
I got banned again today for objecting to an ableist slur.
These have two things in common:
Both times, I objected to ableism.
And both times, after my post disappeared, I assumed it was just another glitch, and I reposted.
They have a formal rule against reposting deleted posts. But computers and internet connections glitch all the time, which is why we are all encouraged to save before posting, in case we have to repost. Everyone reposts. So banning people for reposting doesn’t make any sense, and isn’t believable. They didn’t bother to tell me that they’d deliberately deleted the post, or why, so I assumed it was just another glitch and I reposted. But banning people for objecting to ableism, and covering it with bullshit about banning for reposting is quite believable.
I got banned again today for objecting to an ableist slur.
These have two things in common:
Both times, I objected to ableism.
And both times, after my post disappeared, I assumed it was just another glitch, and I reposted.
They have a formal rule against reposting deleted posts. But computers and internet connections glitch all the time, which is why we are all encouraged to save before posting, in case we have to repost. Everyone reposts. So banning people for reposting doesn’t make any sense, and isn’t believable. They didn’t bother to tell me that they’d deliberately deleted the post, or why, so I assumed it was just another glitch and I reposted. But banning people for objecting to ableism, and covering it with bullshit about banning for reposting is quite believable.
no subject
Date: 2017-01-04 06:13 pm (UTC)Because hurting people is "entertaining."