5 ms·

It is objectively whataboutism, and welcome to the real world.

• faeriechangling 4y ago
  People pointing out rules that have gone unenforced being enforced the moment somebody unpopular comes along is not whataboutism. The point of the argument isn't admonishing the behaviour of others to cover for your own, which is the point of the whataboutism argument. Whataboutism requires you to avoid the critical question or argument, that is not the case here, the critical question is the interpretation of the moderation policy. It is essential to discuss how policy has been enforced in the past in a discussion about the fairness of a policies enforcement. It would be very obnoxious if every time somebody cited a similar case to the current enforcement action they were accused of whataboutism and told to live in the real world.
  • tragictrash 4y ago
    [flagged]
    • effingwewt 4y ago
      All your comments are one or two sentences- I'd say you're specifically trying to avoid discussion then. Also, I'd say your comment was a lot of words to say nothing, while OP was having a good faith discussion. Maybe try responding in good faith instead of snark and pettiness, or at the very least have a cogent argument other than 'I disagree so go away'.
      • tragictrash 4y ago
        • effingwewt 4y ago
          • tragictrash 4y ago