My post got removed despite it being from a reliable source (Ukrayinska Pravda- Media Bias/ Fact check.)
I am not looking to participate in a community where mods remove posts based on their feelings about the source, there needs to be a proof to the mod claim.
Why did my post got removed in this case?
How is the source unreliable, what is the mod proof for that?
That’s why they should be falling back on the reputable sources as shown by their own MBFC bot instead of playing backseat journalist and questioning individual sources within an article.
Sure, but if no reputable sources are available for a specific matter yet (which is especially common when it comes to war bullet-ins from the government of one of the two fronts) then what? Moreover, what would “falling back” consist of? Positing a comment? The user that posted the thing was not banned, and they were clearly instructed to re-post from a more reliable source.
But that’s the whole point - the source linked in the original post is deemed to be reliable by their own determined tool. So why is a mod nitpicking the text within the linked article? It’s either a reputable source or not. They kept stuff from the New York Times about the Oct 6 attacks even though that didn’t have good sources, and they throw out anything from Fox News even if it’s factually correct.
The mod made a mistake and didn’t seem to realize that the Ukrainian Pravda (legit, privately owner, reliable) is different from Russian Pravda (owned by Russian Communist Party, propaganda) - and keeps coming up with excuses why he did what he did. It’s sad