Officer Hotpants 
"[@office mare":](/images/54168#comment_43366
)
Every time I see responses to you I think someone's responded to_*me._
*
Like claiming that their policy changes were due to community feedback, then creating seas of red text in their attempt to hide the fact that the feedback they were getting wasn't coming from the_*DB_* community. Then trying to hide what they were doing by falsely marking deleted comments to make them look like off-topic conversations and rule violations. Then trying to hide that they were doing _*that_* when people started screencapping conversations to prove it by deleting any post containing screencaps of the wrongfully deleted comments. This online archive (that was supposedly never an archive even though they, themselves, called it one in the dumbass tweet that started it all) somehow couldn't wrap its head around the idea that all this online activity would be archived.
Then there was making a new rule that you couldn't leave negative feedback on images supporting their new pet issues--specifically BLM, Antifa and anything LGBT--and going so far as to add shadowfilters to people's accounts to prevent them from seeing such images, ban marked users from commenting on images with the protected tags and even throttling people's connections to the site to try to run them off without having to openly ban them (because even_*they_* realized "banned for using site functionality as intended" would make them look like retards).
So in short:
They took a stance on an issue they knew little-to-nothing about that was irrelevant to the site, changed the site's policies to match while claimed they made the decision based upon user feedback, implemented several underhanded tools to create the illusion of community support and then spent the next month attempting to silence_*actual_* commusernity feedback on the matter. And when they got caught (and they got caught many, many times) the best rebuttal they could offer was _*"nuh uh"_* and more of the same activity paired with allegations of racism.
Moderator
Double-0 Negative
Every time I see responses to you I think someone's responded to
Like claiming that their policy changes were due to community feedback, then creating seas of red text in their attempt to hide the fact that the feedback they were getting wasn't coming from the
Then there was making a new rule that you couldn't leave negative feedback on images supporting their new pet issues--specifically BLM, Antifa and anything LGBT--and going so far as to add shadowfilters to people's accounts to prevent them from seeing such images, ban marked users from commenting on images with the protected tags and even throttling people's connections to the site to try to run them off without having to openly ban them (because even
So in short:
They took a stance on an issue they knew little-to-nothing about that was irrelevant to the site, changed the site's policies to match while claimed they made the decision based upon user feedback, implemented several underhanded tools to create the illusion of community support and then spent the next month attempting to silence