Earlier today drag was banned from [email protected] for this post: https://lemmy.nz/post/15864724

The reason stated was “Dishonest headline and quoting”.

The sidebar of the community states the following on article titles:

Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive.

The article’s original title was “Harris vs. Trump spoiler’s supporter says the quiet part out loud” - in drag’s opinion, this is clickbait. The quiet part is not stated in the title. The reader has to click on the article in order to learn what it’s actually about.

Drag’s post title was “Jill Stein ally says the Greens’ strategy is about making Harris lose the presidency” - this clearly states which group is involved and what precisely the controversial statement was. But drag was banned for making the title more clear.

The sidebar of the community states the following on article quotes:

Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Drag quoted three passages from the article in the post body: The quote from the Jill Stein ally which the article was about, and two passages about Donald Trump’s relation to these events. None of the quotes were edited. As asked by the sidebar drag did not post the entire body, only the parts drag believed was relevant, and drag was banned for following this rule too.

The vast majority of comments on the post, including all the highly upvoted comments, agreed with the points made by the article and expressed zero problem with the presentation. There were two comments which had a problem with drag’s presentation of the article:

…um, where is the second half of this article? (2 upvotes)

This comment is a non-issue; posting the entire article in the body is against the community rules. Drag was following the rules by only posting half.

Least dishonest LW politics OP quoting an entire article out of context (1 upvote)

This comment agrees with the moderation decision but does not explain why, and drag can’t work out why on drag’s own. Drag tried drag’s best to represent the article accurately.

  • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 days ago

    I don’t know if they have a reason for it, but I do know that as soon as I see it, I skip the rest of whatever was written.

    • Dragon Rider (drag)@lemmy.nzOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      23
      ·
      18 days ago

      Drag uses drag/dragself person-independent pronouns. Drag’s pronouns are conjugated and inflected the same way in all grammatical persons. “Drag” is not drag’s name, drag’s name is Dragon Rider. Drag is using a first person pronoun just like you might write “I”.

      • gwilikers@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        18 days ago

        Drag is using a first person pronoun just like you might write “I”.

        Why does drag refer to drag’s self in this way?

        Also, drag’s name is not Dragon Rider. Unless that drag was referring to drag’s chosen name?