Are TERF-centric magazines allowed on this insurance?

No, fascists (which TERFs are) should not be allowed to fester here.

The magazine's rule #1: NO BIGOTRY omfg I can't 🤣🤣🤣🤣

@ernest You should look into that, how is it allowed?

I tried to report this magazine using the "contact" page a while back as it violates the kbin.social terms of service, but I guess as long as it's only one nutjob posting and all the posts are getting disliked, it isn't really a priority to remove.

Ugh, and 10A somehow also hasn't been banned yet (and a quick check to his profile shows that he isn't just still making bad-faith arguments about "free speech" but is also still spreading xenophobia, fake news about the last election, and so on).

I'm out. Anyone know of a kbin (not lemmy) instance with reasonably good moderation?

I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall fight to the death to defend your right to say it.

When you ban people, you tell them to go form an echo chamber where they'll flourish.

A more intelligent approach is to imitate Daryl Davis, who has convinced hundreds of KKK members to leave the KKK, simply by respectfully talking with them.

You might actually learn a thing or two in the process.

The magazine name is Modern Misogyny and rule 1 is "No bigotry - misogyny...".
That is like dividing by zero.

Right now, it appears to exist only with one user posting to himself. It is not a big problem. However, if you don't clean these things up quickly, you end up with a Nazi bar. Voat started out very Libertarian, but by the time it closed, its front page was dominated by hard-core antisemitism, it literally became a Nazi hang-out. Tolerance of intolerance ends up allowing the intolerance to spread and become the majority. kbin.social can not end up like that.

How does one report a magazine and/or a user? I presume reporting posts in that magazine will just go to the bigoted owner, so no help there.

I don't want to just block them, I want to know when they're pushing their bigotry somewhere.

Apparently, almost everything (within the law) is allowed until it generates enough controversy to annoy the admin, in which case it is banned regardless of whether it violated the code of conduct or not.

I can define principle if you like? I'm not confusing anything. The principle of the quote was concerning those who would apply force to prevent speech, not those who chose not to offer assholes a soapbox. But go on.

Please do point to the text that suggests that opening your living room up to people who want you dead so they can tell you so is a "core principle."

Or I can exercise my privilege as a user of this site and ask that @ernest remove the rules-violating magazine from the site.