Rule 2
Russian propaganda is factually incorrect. All factually incorrect information that isn’t obviously satire should have matching citations explaining why it’s incorrect.
Rule 4
Russian propaganda is hatespeech.
Rule 5
No politics.
I don’t pretend to be unbiased or neutral. If what you want is a rule that says don’t suck Russian cock by propagating the talking points of war criminals, I’ll be glad to add it.
How does deleting controversial opinions (that aren’t hate speech or call for violence) help anyone?
If you came to a defense shitposting community looking for help you may have come to the wrong place.
Doesn’t need to be hate speech for it to be removed.
Russian shills just aren’t welcome here. They can fuck off to their motherland until their imperial sock puppet of a dictator stops invading sovereign nations.
Rule 2 Russian propaganda is factually incorrect. All factually incorrect information that isn’t obviously satire should have matching citations explaining why it’s incorrect.
Rule 4 Russian propaganda is hatespeech.
Rule 5 No politics.
I don’t pretend to be unbiased or neutral. If what you want is a rule that says don’t suck Russian cock by propagating the talking points of war criminals, I’ll be glad to add it.
If you came to a defense shitposting community looking for help you may have come to the wrong place.
Russia is bad and tells only lies, but this is a pretty egregious twisting of Rule 4
Trying to sell the lie that NATO is at war with Russia is literally Russian MOD talking points.
Yes, agreed. That doesn’t make it hate speech. You undermine the concept of hate speech when you abuse it like this.
Doesn’t need to be hate speech for it to be removed.
Russian shills just aren’t welcome here. They can fuck off to their motherland until their imperial sock puppet of a dictator stops invading sovereign nations.
Then we should add a new rule that better encompasses the intent such as “No misinformation”.