Indeed. I thought about that too. There are two facets of this problem: my style and the context. About my style, if it frightened a woman online I’m all for her banning me. I am horrified of things like Gamer Gate and the sheer stupidity of fellow gendered folks who want to harm and insult women, just to conceal their weakness and flash their bigotry in the process.
The other aspect is the context. Bernie v Hillary is a political debate. Are we seriously going to wash out, dilute, add water to our thinking, or are we going to fight aggression and micro aggression, harm and harassment by being alert and spot on these wrong doings?
Frankly, I am amazed of this attention to me, random Joe of the internets, in the context of the US elections. I really hope, with all fear and regret, that somehow my words were too aggressive or stupid and she got tired and scared of stupid people, so tired that a second sight of my username in a feed caused panic and fatigue. That would be OK.
What I really don’t hope for is an idea ban, a ban because a debate is considered a defocus, I really hope that this block is not some purging of a feed taking opposing views away. It is important that disagreeing opinions and ideas stick around, especially when you commit to a political debate, when you propose such a thing as a Council for Human Decency, because we are all humans and if we don’t get down and dirty with the minds of the others we may fall for the, behold:
In psychology, the false-consensus effect or false-consensus bias is an attributional type of cognitive bias whereby…
How can you tell if you’re right if you don’t let people tell you so?
Again, maybe my style was somehow out of line! IDK, I just made this a big boo hoo because I fear this is not the case. Thank you :), and keep up the good work!