Dr. Shades, is it against the rules to start a political thread that is primarily using information from one particular?

[Hound of Heaven]

Dr. Shades. In the last three months, Kishkumen and a few others have initiated numerous threads that revolve around the same topic or something similar, and many of these discussions lack substance. And I think Kishkumen should be allowed to do so.

However, when I initiate a thread that I believe is intriguing and potentially valuable for the board's readers, Canpakes seems to take issue with my contributions due to my non-progressive stance. Clearly, Canpakes will likely come on here to assert that this isn't the reason, but it's evident to everyone that it is.

Dr. Shades, is it permissible for me to initiate a thread focused on videos from the Benny Johnson YouTube Channel? I find his videos quite engaging and believe they contribute significantly to the political discussion at hand.

[Hound of Heaven]

To illustrate Canpakes' bias against me for not being a progressive, consider this example: Dr. Shades, Canpakes permits Jersey Girl to recommend YouTube channels, yet not me. Why didn't Canpakes use red lettering in the Jersey Girls thread as was done in my thread? It seems we are all aware of the reasons why.

[Molok]

Huge fan of your impotent whine sessions, Hound. Keep up the good work!

[Hound of Heaven]

Dear Dr. Shades, Thirty-two percent of Americans obtain their news from YouTube. While this is a fact, I assert that your moderator Canpakes seeks to censor my free speech on this esteemed platform, as Canpakes recognizes the power of videos in effectively conveying a message.

Canpakes becomes increasingly annoyed with my capacity to counter the progressive nonsense that is expressed on this board and believes that if my threads are compiled into one large thread, they will be less likely to attract attention. For Canpakes, the focus is on having control over the information.

[canpakes]

Dear Dr. Shades, Thirty-two percent of Americans obtain their news from YouTube.

Then they already know how to go to YouTube for their news.

Your continuing attempts at rule lawyering are fun to watch, at least.
: )

[canpakes]

Ah. An A.I. generated response.

[Dr. Shades]

To illustrate Canpakes' bias against me for not being a progressive, consider this example: Dr. Shades, Canpakes permits Jersey Girl to recommend YouTube channels, yet not me. Why didn't Canpakes use red lettering in the Jersey Girls thread as was done in my thread? It seems we are all aware of the reasons why.

I can't imagine canpakes not letting you recommend YouTube channels, just as long as you don't "link-and-run."

And I don't know what red lettering was done in what thread. Please post a link.

[Hound of Heaven]

To illustrate Canpakes' bias against me for not being a progressive, consider this example: Dr. Shades, Canpakes permits Jersey Girl to recommend YouTube channels, yet not me. Why didn't Canpakes use red lettering in the Jersey Girls thread as was done in my thread? It seems we are all aware of the reasons why.

I can't imagine canpakes not letting you recommend YouTube channels, just as long as you don't "link-and-run."

And I don't know what red lettering was done in what thread. Please post a link.

[Dr. Shades]

Was that the only thread you started today that recommends a particular YouTube channel?

[Hound of Heaven]

Was that the only thread you started today that recommends a particular YouTube channel?

The thread was started yesterday to provide a look into why many voters are being drawn towards the optimism the Republicans influences are producing compared to my Democrat party.

Maybe the thread you're thinking about is the one I started today that's dedicated to black men and why they are leaving the Democrat party?