As a newbie I'd like to know (after having read the NYT piece) what is up with both founders of this site being incels? Is this just a coincidence? I personally don't like incels and I definitely don't Identify as one so I would certainly Not like to think I'm part of an incel majority site or one run by incels. If I remember right misogyny is part of the abuse that can get a member banned on here and I haven't seen any vitriol leveled at women so I don't think this is a misogynistic/incel forum, I just want some clarity thanks. Also I will add going private makes it sound like we have something to hide, no one on here is coercing others into suicide I hope (another banable offence I believe?) so I feel like (to use a metaphor) we're reeling in all our lifebuoys and away from the reach of those drowning at sea. I have emailed elected politicians in my area (using my real name) to show my support for assisted suicide (in the past couple of years, nothing too recent) so I care only a little about my privacy. Fuck doxxers and all that but I worry that going private makes us look guilty and it makes us harder to find for those who really need to read what we say so as to not feel so alone and ctb out of despair. As someone who truly has nothing to lose I think it's worth the risk trading in my privacy to stay open so that the public can see what shams the NYT and Buzzfeed are and so that people who need this sub can find it.....Is there an existential threat to this forum that merits this site becoming increasingly private: I don't know. The NYT are scum, they are the elitist cheerleaders to coercive lockdowns that have resulted in hundred (or more accurately thousands) of times more "deaths of despair" from lockdowns than this site would have ever encouraged. For those who CAN live joyous meaningful lives...they should, the NYT definitely doesn't think that way, they are hypocrits.
