We partially agree on this. You posted a lot of very specially tailored articles. It is a political community- so that’s not the part that’s a problem. While the amount of the posts was a lot- that we agree on, the bias in the subject matter was absolutely tilted towards an anti-Biden agenda.

Your posts still are, but that’s your thing. You’re allowed to hate whoever you’d like. I think the saying is- you’re free to say what you want, and everyone else is free to call it out.

To summarize, you didn’t do anything wrong by being anti-Biden, that’s opinion related. What you did wrong was spam a community which is against the rules.

At least that’s what the mods were saying.

I appreciate your input on this. I had you blocked for a bit, not because of your political position, but because your posts demonstrating your knowing "which headlines/articles will get the most engagement from all sides" ignored the quality of that engagement.

I'm not sure why I have this perspective while everyone else in the thread announcing your ban was upset about the spamming aspect, like Jim above. I found that your posts and comments were never aimed at fostering constructive discussion. Instead, they seemed designed to provoke reactions, which 99.9% of the time resulted in screaming matches and insults. I wouldn’t want to make this accusation, except that you have now more or less admitted to it here.

This is why I disagree with Tropical’s defense of you. Your content did indeed maximize engagement, but it was exhausting to read through. I never felt I was missing out with you blocked because other posts, similar to yours, hosted much more constructive and less toxic discussions.

And note that this still fits the definition of spam, as it was clear from the modlogs that your content was putting an extra burden on the moderators with the amount of inappropriate content it generated.

I'm not a mod, but hearing you say this makes my thoughts on the situation clearer. I hope they might be helpful to you as well.