The article is itself a second hand account. However, it quotes very specific incidents, especially this:
> And so, one of the moderators changed the pronouns in their nickname to “who/cares”. […] Let’s be real, this isn’t like, calling someone the N-word or something.
I don't care what the political affiliation of the moderator is, but this is pretty low for any community.
Not really? If you have a problem person within a community, it’s fairly common to make fun of them. You wouldn’t say it was “low” if a similar thing happened to someone you disagreed with politically.
Misusing moderator privilege to 'make fun of them' is not 'fairly common' or even considered acceptable. Please stop downplaying unacceptable and toxic behavior.
> You wouldn’t say it was “low” if a similar thing happened to someone you disagreed with politically.
It is low for a moderator to misuse their privilege, irrespective of their political stance. It's a good standard to judge people by - whether they are right, left or center.
You haven’t spent much time on IRC/forums, have you? Gatekeeping undesirables was and still is a common practice in those circles, one that keeps the community safe from external activists that wish to corrupt it. This is not “abusing mod powers”, this is cleaning bad actors from the community. Even HackerNews has methods in place to mitigate bad actors, although they’re far more hidden and frankly more dangerous than simply being told one is unwelcome.
Condescension, hubris, hatred - it's clear what you're arguing for. No - what you said isn't normal. But I'm sure you're aren't going to stop arguing for the right to bigotry and hatred.
The article is itself a second hand account. However, it quotes very specific incidents, especially this:
> And so, one of the moderators changed the pronouns in their nickname to “who/cares”. […] Let’s be real, this isn’t like, calling someone the N-word or something.
I don't care what the political affiliation of the moderator is, but this is pretty low for any community.