I have never observed anybody getting banned for presenting verifiable truths, and i've been here for a while already... Since it's impossible to proof nobody gets banned for telling the truth, i cannot present said proof.
I've seen people picking fights with the admin, i've seen scammers, i've seen people getting involved with all kind of shady behaviour,... I haven't seen anybody getting banned for this.
I HAVE seen people that got banned for plagiarism, for doxxing, for relentless trolling and spamming, for threatening with physical violence... But not for telling inconvenient truths.
Since you ask, i can only assume you got an (alt)account that was banned?
No. But if I did have an account banned for presenting independently verifiable truths concerning actions specifically taking place on the forum. Would that be reasonable.
Should a person be banned for presenting independently verifiable truths in the manner described clearly in the OP.
Regardless of " whom" these truths relate to?
Why should there be punishment for presenting the undeniable truth?
Wow did anyone notice suchmoon changed their usual stalking spamming off topic irrelevant demand for debate to cease to now her begging for those that have been proven to speak the truth to be banned ? Then speculating and guessing on irrelevant and off topic crying and whining. Stop begging suchmoon. Get up off your scabby knees and enter the debate rather than hiding and running away from me. Try something that isn't a straw man or illogical outcomes based upon wishful speculation.
Please stop begging for people to stop presenting independently verifiable truths.
These are the types of devious and greedy sig spamming scammer supporters we need to ban.
One can dream about that.
Please ban the truth suchmoon would like that.
Now back on topic. Is presenting the independently verifiable truth a good reason for a ban.
Inconvenient truths even independently variable ones should banned ?
Yes or No?
Give specific examples.
