Does it even matter if the subreddit is "private"?

@poluamater - I’m not trying to tear you down; I am quite literally attempting—albeit unsuccessfully—to guide you toward actually respecting this subforum's rules. Please, just read them. And let’s be real: I wasn't born yesterday, so it’s perfectly obvious why someone who just registered, never posts about politics, yet suddenly shows an intense interest in this specific section and knows all the regular users by name, is acting a bit suspicious.

@Robin Lopez2/">@@Robin Lopez2 - If you don't like the vibe at one bar, just go to another. I honestly don't see the issue here, nor do I understand why you'd sit there in silence and just take it, especially since you basically admitted it yourself in your last sentence.

The moderators aren't the ones providing the content on this forum; their job is simply to maintain order. The users create the content themselves. Therefore, if the discussions feel lukewarm or low-quality, you should look at yourself and the other posters who clearly lack the ability to engage in a civilized debate following the established rules. Instead, they choose to play the victim and throw a tantrum because they're being held to a standard.

Sarah Doyle54 said:What you’re calling an ideological clash, we call being fundamentally incompatible with civilization itself. I get why you see this as intolerance toward political or worldview diversity, but honestly, that’s just the paradox of tolerance: you can't tolerate the intolerant. 😉

The problem starts when you label every single opinion you disagree with as "civilizationally unacceptable" just so you can pretend your own views are the absolute, objective truth...

Éowyn FTW said:Look, this forum isn't some public park. The owner pays for the domain and keeps the lights on, plain and simple... 🤷

For God's sake, what does paying matter? He made the content available to absolutely everyone, so he doesn't get to act like he owns the place. Just because you pay some jerk money doesn't give you the right to do whatever you want or start acting like you run your own private country within the US...

Casey Bennett said:@Robin Lopez2/">@@Robin Lopez2 - if a coffee shop doesn't meet your standards, just go to a different one. I don't see the issue, and I certainly don't understand why anyone would stay silent and just take it. It's exactly what you admitted in your own last sentence.

The reality is, we've never seen a situation here where genuine suggestions from members to improve this community are actually taken seriously. Every single time a thread like this starts, the moderators swoop in, tell us regular users that we're wrong, and shut the whole thing down. I expect this thread will follow that exact same pattern.

Éowyn FTW said:You clearly have no idea what discrimination actually means. How exactly is someone being discriminated against just because they got a ban on a US forum...

Take a look at my ban status and why I got hit. Some Stormfront troll has managed to infiltrate this forum pretty effectively, and they’re getting away with posting on some of the most sensitive topics we've ever seen. I'm not even here to talk about myself. I'll say it again: this isn't just about the bans. It's about how one specific ideology is being forced down our throats based on criteria that looks suspiciously like old-school American collectivist thinking—where the government decides they know what you wanted and did better than you actually did...

Joshua Clark7 said:The real issue is when you label anything you disagree with as "uncivilized," while acting like your own opinions are the absolute, objective truth that everyone else has to swallow.

Actually, I think it's the exact opposite. The problem starts when people push anti-social views and try to mask them as just being "differently opinionated." Then, if anyone points out how toxic those views actually are, they get slapped with the "leftist liberal" label to shut them down. Look, free speech in American society isn't a blank check; it has boundaries. As long as you stay within those lines, whether you're left-wing, right-wing, or somewhere in between, you're welcome to speak. It’s honestly a shame (😬 ) that the current boundaries seem skewed so heavily toward liberals that anyone with an outlier perspective has to jump through hoops just to prove their worldview deserves equal footing. It doesn't. Your views are fine up to a point, but once you cross that line, you're out.

Joshua Clark7 said:For God's sake, who cares who pays for it? He made the content available to everyone, so he shouldn't be allowed to act however the hell he wants.

Sure, making the content available is one thing, but helping build it is a whole different story.

Who exactly is setting those boundaries? You? And based on what? Now you're labeling me a white supremacist just like that. You have absolutely no idea how wrong you are or how much of an insult that is.
People like you honestly terrify me. It’s fine while you're just venting on a forum, but what happens when you actually get the power to decide someone's fate through the system one day?

Joshua Clark7 said:Who's setting those boundaries? You? And where exactly are you drawing them?

Long story short.

So now you've branded me an Alt-right movement supporter too.

I didn't. I brought up the Alt-right movement just as an (extreme) example of how we don't want people talking here—you know, how they used to write about immigrants and feminism, which ended up turning some forum users permanently gray. (Actually, I just banned an Alt-right movement repeat offender, so maybe that's what triggered my response). I get that mentioning the Alt-right movement right after saying you're partly responsible for derailing threads could be taken the wrong way. If that's how you took it, I'm sorry; I really didn't mean it like that.

People like you actually scare me. It's fine while you're just holding this attitude on a forum. But what happens when you eventually get the chance to decide someone's fate through the actual system?

Not happening. Even if I actually wanted to be some tyrant forcing everyone to agree with me, the system isn't built to let me do that. We moderators aren't just acting on whims here; we're part of a group, and everything we do—our rules, our moderation style, even our own standing in the admin hierarchy—is subject to being questioned, debated, and changed by the rest of the team. Basically, the group acts as a check and balance. On this site, specifically, it means each of us has a little bit of autonomy for small stuff (like deleting a post, giving a warning, or adjusting points so someone doesn't get banned), but for the big calls (like permanent bans, partial bans, or deciding how to handle sensitive threads), we make those decisions together. Plus, we have super-mods and admins above us who can step in to challenge or back up our decisions with actual reasoning.

Sarah Doyle54 said:Basically.

I wasn't. I was using the Alt-right movement as an (extreme) example of how we don't want people writing here—how they used to write about immigrants and feminism, which ended up turning some forum users permanently gray (I actually just banned an Alt-right recidivist, so maybe that inspired my response). I get that mentioning the Alt-right movement right after saying you're part of the reason topics get derailed could be misread. If that's how you took it, I apologize, that wasn't my intention.

And how am I responsible, other than the fact that I don't buy into the feminist agenda? I take pride in the fact that I built everything in my life with my own two hands. I took on the hardest jobs without complaining, starting at home, and then I paid my way through high school and college entirely out of my own pocket. After that, I paid for expensive certifications myself and gained real skills through massive sacrifices. That’s why I’m an uncompromising advocate for meritocracy. Feminism is the exact opposite of that. Quotas and meritocracy don't mix, and once you start feeling the effects of that personally, views like mine become inevitable.

Sarah Doyle54 said:Impossible; even if I truly wanted to be a tyrant forcing everyone to agree, the system won't let me. We moderators aren't just acting on whims; we're part of a collective. All our decisions, the principles we moderate by, and even our own positions in the admin hierarchy are subject to questioning, negotiation, and changes by that group. So, the collective acts as the corrective force. Specifically, on this forum, it means each of us has a certain level of autonomy for minor calls (like someone deleting a post, issuing a warning, or docking points to prevent a ban), but for the big stuff (like permanent bans, partial bans, or deciding how to handle sensitive threads), we decide together. And on top of us, you have super-mods and admins who can argue against or uphold our decisions based on logic.

The system is only a corrective factor until the management structure gets filled with people who all think exactly the same way...

It seems to me that there is nothing left here to clarify, so I shall close this thread. The initial example regarding the removal of Black patrons from a restaurant was misguided and easily debunked. A more apt comparison would be a restaurant that enforces a specific dress code for entry. In such a scenario, whether you are Black, white, male, female, a billionaire, or a cobbler, your identity is irrelevant; access is granted based on adherence to the rules, not on who you are.
Much appreciated.