So expressing contrarian opinions is grounds for banning?
As always, it’s a matter of degree and interaction on how well argumented your position is. So yes, you can express a sufficiently contrarian opinion that would lead to banning. “All women should be treated as sex slaves”, for example, is such an opinion.
Except he did explain why he believes what he does.
I asked aa at least twice, possibly more, what evidence he had for his assertions and got nothing back. Can you point me to a place where he did so? A post mortem would still be useful.
So yes, you can express a sufficiently contrarian opinion that would lead to banning. “All women should be treated as sex slaves”, for example, is such an opinion.
But I don’t think even you would argue that the reason for banning that opinion is its contrariness.
So expressing contrarian opinions is grounds for banning?
Except he did explain why he believes what he does.
As always, it’s a matter of degree and interaction on how well argumented your position is.
So yes, you can express a sufficiently contrarian opinion that would lead to banning. “All women should be treated as sex slaves”, for example, is such an opinion.
I asked aa at least twice, possibly more, what evidence he had for his assertions and got nothing back. Can you point me to a place where he did so? A post mortem would still be useful.
But I don’t think even you would argue that the reason for banning that opinion is its contrariness.