Um…no… this is just gender-swapped RFK Jr (from her Wikipedia page):

A “both-and” approach (both prayer and medicine) to physical and mental health has been attributed to Williamson.[98] Williamson has said, “People who are prayed for get out of the emergency room faster,” and “people who have been diagnosed with a life-challenging illness, who attend spiritual support groups, live, on average, twice as long after diagnosis”.[11][99][100]

Williamson has stated her support for the necessity and value of vaccinations and antidepressants,[101][102] but has been criticized for her skepticism about the pharmaceutical industry’s influence in setting guidelines for how they are administered, citing her belief that their profit motive could result in harm to patients.[103][104][105]

She has also criticized overprescription of antidepressants,[97][106] questioning whether antidepressants play a role in suicide, saying that the prescriptive definition between sadness and clinical depression is “artificial”, and having called the process by which clinical depression is diagnosed “a scam”.[107][102]

That is simply not true. Initially the replies to him were not antagonistic - he started taking that tone when the community asked him about the disparity between his professed beliefs and what he was posting and asking why he was supposedly voting third party. He then ran the table on the mods by engaging in a constant stream of spammy, low effort comments and you all did nothing. And the more you did nothing, the more frustrated and angry everyone became about him.

The mods should at least be able to recognize your hand in how UM played out, instead of blaming it only on the users engaging in “slap fights”. The mods chose to moderate per post/comment instead of also considering an account’s overall pattern of behavior.

The rules - as written - seem to indicate a level of judgement and assessment that has not been taking place, and user frustration is evident as many of us see how a pattern of behavior of trolling was allowed to continue for much too long because the user in question almost never went too far in any individual message but was quite clearly outside the rules when looked at as a whole.

I admire your stance on not doing a fast-and-loose approach to bans to protect individual voices, but your job as mods also involves protecting these communities from intentional and purposeful bad actors

Good article, but man, does anyone else find it weird when CNBC is using “claps back” in headlines? I guess it’s outdated enough now to by used by them, but just struck me as odd.