So, earlier, I made a thread about a controversial and destructive policy of the site, with the hopes of promoting discussion about it and finding workable alternatives that didn't involve arbitrary regressive and sexist decisions actively enforced by the administration. Instead of letting people discuss it in a civil manner, it was locked within minutes of its creation, thus preventing anyone else from airing their concerns on the matter!
What's the purpose of having a forum if those that moderate the forum simply shut down all opposing opinions? If I made a thread that expressed praise and approval of the same subject, it likely wouldn't be locked. So what gives? And why isn't there more transparency in the administration process? Why can't we see which moderators lock threads, so the people who are promoting the toxic self-reinforcement hugbox can be pointed out and have action taken against them? It seems particularly authoritarian to me.
Updated by NotMeNotYou