4 ms·
FYI, you were shadowbanned four days ago, probably automatically for your multiple flagged-to-death comments here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33208156
by anon_123g987 4y ago
FYI, you were shadowbanned four days ago, probably automatically for your multiple flagged-to-death comments here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33208156 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33208156. Maybe you should try to appeal to the mods.
- bayesian_horse 4y agoDoesn't surprise me at all that the nuclear fan-community here is playing dirty.
- MichaelCollins 4y agoMost of his comments in that thread are not flagged, nor even grayed. Most which are grayed or flagged are ones like this: In response to "How exactly will you be 100% renewable during a cloudy and windless period with solar and wind?" he commented "Trolling is unwelcome here, thank you." Seems like a justified flagging to me; with no supporting argument that comment amounts to nothing more than a bare insult. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33209047 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33209047
- bayesian_horse 4y agoNot a justified flagging. It is trolling. People who make that argument about unreliability are at best dishonest. To make that argument either means you know next to nothing about renewable energies other than that wind and sun aren't consistent. Or you are purposefully lying. It is a form of gaslighting. These kind of arguments have been discussed to death but "renewable energy isn't consistent" is either to understand than it is to refute. It takes pages of text to fully explain this and only a few words to repeat the allegation. Sprinkle in a few claims about nuclear power being the only alternative to global warning (with even less proof) and you can shout down anyone who disagrees.
- ncmncm 4y ago
- grzm 4y agoThey weren't shadow banned: they were explicitly banned: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33211562 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33211562