Censorship? There is no censorship!

It was a problem from the day you started doing it. You'd post something, people were confused about what you wanted to say with it, people told you to fucking read and comment what you share. Again and again. You were told to not just post stuff without commenting. That whole "This is not your personal blog"-thing is old. Yet you're still doing it, at least when you're not busy posting stupid meme-reactions to whatever. I guess there was a point when Sander was simply fed up with that.
Just fucking comment on what you write! Give a short summary, write about what you think your link implies, try to fucking think for yourself (and share that, please)!
That's also a big reason why your jokes rarely work. Nobody knows what your real opinion is, so Poe's Law comes into effect frequently. You cite weird-ass pages without comment and then except everyone to understand your jokes.
Fuck, man, to understand your jokes we need to understand who the hell you are, and what your actual opinion is! But we won't get that from your random collection of articles unless you provide some commentary.

 

The point is not the jokes. The point is that the moderation tries to keep a proper discussion going, something you deliberately ignore by posting uncommented articles. So if you already know that simply posting link-collections like a bot doesn't add anything useful, and you understand that clogging up the thread with it is frowned upon, then why are you doing it?
The moderation is consistent in that you have been warned to not do that, you deliberately ignored it and now your link-collections will be vatted until you learn how to contribute to a discussion. Those link-collections together with the memes is not exactly the best way to show that you're interested in actual discussions. Provide actual content and none of your posts will be vatted.

 

Because previously you were engaging in discussion, and now you're just trolling. Though note that you have also repeatedly been told to not just post linkdumps.

There is consistency, here. No one else in this thread is treating this as a linkdump and trolling space. No one in this thread is doing what you were doing. If you want to continue to post here, alter your behavior. If you only want to linkdump and troll while not engaging in discussion, this is not the place for you.

 

I am baffled that GamerGaters like MundaneMatt think the episode was good for them. They were ridiculed throughout. All of their complaints were mocked. They were portrayed as anything from whiny, entitled assholes who feel threatened by women, to violently dangerous whiny, entitled assholes. And while obviously SVU took GamerGate and turned the dial to 11 by going with actual kidnapping, rape and attempted murder rather than sticking with violent threats and swatting, a lot of the details were very much based on the real thing. And yeah, the lingo is embarrassing, and some of the stuff is silly -- it's SVU, that's what they do. But SVU's reach is huge, and this will be the main cultural touchstone for this whole deal for a lot of people. GamerGate does not come out looking good, here.

Here's a supercut of the episode:

 

The episode shows the dismissals and "demonization" (read: describing what has been done to people) to be completely justified, given that everyone on the "GamerGate" side in the episode is either a childish asshole, or a violently dangerous asshole.

Which yes, is a simplification. But it's not a simplification that is good for GamerGate. It's horrible for GamerGate because for a lot of people, this will be their cultural touchstone for this whole six-month clusterfuck.

 

But Mazes and Monsters and Reefer Madness both had a pretty big impact on how the public saw D&D and weed, respectively. Yeah, we laugh at that now because it's idiotic, but those campaigns shaped the public's views for quite some time.

That's not to say that this episode will have that impact. I don't think it will. But I can't for the life of me figure out how anyone can think this episode is good for GamerGate in any way.

 

That may be what you think people should do, but it's not at all what people actually do. People listen to and get their information from the media they consume.

EDIT: Oh hey, GamerGate's perfect example of an ethical journalist Milo Yiannopoulos wrote a hitpiece wherein he outs a trans woman based on there being a forum user somewhere with the same name, and then ascribes that forum user's actions to the 'outed' woman based on...that one connection. The number of gross ethical violations in that piece astounds me. And it's one of the top articles on KotakuInAction. Because GamerGate is about ethics in journalism! That is, excusing the complete lack of them. I'm not linking any of it because fuck. that. noise.