hmmm… interesting that you conveniently respond after falling into the bucket of those guilty being called out publicly.
let’s then talk about the particular case with you. there’s a post (on a thread not created by me) which i was respectfully engaging in expressing my deeply held opinions (on the threads main topic) which were then undermined (by being irrelevant) by another poster. naturally as anyone trying to be and do things seriously, a person who then engages in nuisance behaviour becomes aggravating. so i sternly responsed - without insults - all the while trying to get them to contribute productively to the matter at hand. on further inspection of their posts - i realised that this person is a mercenary not missionary, they care about the money not the mission. which is a point of contention for many projects within the crypto space, and interactions like these are important to have and learn from collectively.
i’m having to retell this in an abridged form to give context as chances are majority if not one of you ever read this exchange as it was censored shortly after. why? did it contain “spam, fraud and unethical content” ? No. was i asked ahead of time, if i minded or consented? No. it’s was only after the fact that i was notified as “clarity” was the reason given. so was it ever reinstated after i expressed that i didn’t consent? No.
now, this is just one instance - what’s worrisome about this is that it possibly respresents further hidden cases of abuse of power, and set a deadly precedent.
a precedent where an abuser can do so with impunity without the victim being able to prove their case cause… that’s rights, they are now censored so the evidence doesn’t exist!
so who watches the watchmen, or rather the self appointed “guardians”. what oversight is their for your actions?