
[BOR]
0: Safe
1: posts have the following requirements:
2: Do not copy the entire article into your post.
3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed.
5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative).
6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
7: We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting.

[EOR]
[BOC]
Wow thanks man! You sure are unbiased using an example from the popcorn stand in a meta subreddit about SRD!

Thing is though, that was actually the first thread I made on SRD and I saw all these biased titles on threads about askmen so I thought that was the way you had to make threads on SRD. Didn't even know there was a rule against biased titles. This is just 1 thread going in the opposite direction and it got deleted really fast. There are tons of threads with even more biased titles that don't get deleted anyway cause they fit the right agenda. If it was up to me threads would be more neutral, but if there are gonna be tons of threads with an agenda then yea I don't feel like I'm wrong posting a biased title in the opposite direction. Pretty sad in a post about bias you need to bring up one deleted thread that doesn't fit the usual 'menz are bad' srd agenda. 


Also whats the point of unbiased titles if the OP is gonna steer the thread in one direction anyway with this first comment, which I've seen you do several times.

Overal just pretty laughable when you talk about bias when pretty much everyone on SRD knows how biased you are, I really dont know why you don't just give up the act.
[EOC]

0: Safe