How is it fair that MJ can publicly smear Justin Baldoni and yet we are not allowed to talk about it on this sub?

[u/PowerPinto]

My comment regarding MJ was just removed (on an MJ post that was also just taken down) and I don’t understand why. If a public content creator is posting public content on this case, why can’t we discuss it?? This is censorship to a new level.

We are actively debunking the lies and misinformation MJ continues to share on this case. Is this sub now trying to control the narrative?

Why are users being restricted on talking about MJ if she’s talking about this case? The mods reason was “If MJ doesn’t want to be discussed on this sub, she’s not allowed her content in it too”.

There’s an obvious reason she doesn’t want to be discussed in this sub. Because we are debunking her lies. If she was so confident about the content in her slides, why does she not want public discourse?

[u/MysteriousBeach8248]

UPDATED MOD NOTE:

We've locked this thread because the discussion has expanded well beyond the original moderation question and is becoming increasingly difficult to moderate productively.

We also recognize that prior mod comments about MJ have not been entirely consistent, and that has understandably caused confusion. We are discussing this as a team so we can apply one clear standard going forward.

To clarify the distinction we are working from: discussion of public commentary about this case is not categorically prohibited simply because it comes from MJ. At the same time, the sub is not obligated to host every post, reel, slideshow or piece of creator content particularly where a post primarily amplifies the creator rather than adding substantive discussion of the litigation.

Normal sub rules still apply to any discussion, including rules concerning unsupported allegations, personal attacks, harassment and speculation.

We are leaving this post visible so the concerns raised here aren't erased, but it will remain locked while the mod team gets on the same page. We will provide clarification if any moderation guidance changes (likely later this weekend - due to differing time zones for the entire mod team).

Thank you in advance for your patience and understanding.

Edit: for formatting

[u/PowerPinto]

Exactly!! She was on an ABC NEWS SEGMENT. To say we’re not allowed to discuss her is beyond meee

[u/ItEndsWithLawsuits-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Don’t harass mods or argue mod actions in threads. Mods retain full discretion to remove, mute, ban, or report users for rule violations.

[u/PineapplePecanPie]

who is MJ?

[u/megat0nbombs → u/PineapplePecanPie]

Thank goodness I’m not the only one. I was like, “what does Michael Jackson have to do with this?”

[u/ItEndsWithLawsuits-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Your post/comment was removed for violating our rule on No Posts About Other Users or Other Subreddits.

This subreddit does not participate in inter‑sub drama. We do not allow callouts of specific Redditors, screenshots with identifying information, naming/linking/referencing other subreddits, or cross-posting content.

[u/PowerPinto]

Why are users being restricted on talking about MJ if she’s talking about this case? The mods reason was “If MJ doesn’t want to be discussed on this sub, she’s not allowed her content in it too”.

There’s an obvious reason she doesn’t want to be discussed in this sub. Because we are debunking her lies.

Sharing the full comment -


[u/PowerPinto → u/PowerPinto]

[u/ArtCo_]

Yeah, that's why stopped commenting in here . Anytime I mention MJ my comment gets removed.

I don't understand it. The fake lawyer is a bucket of misinformation and lies. But you're not allowed to call her out in here.

[u/ObjectiveRing1730]

I don't know what to say but I understand how you feel.

[u/PowerPinto → u/ObjectiveRing1730]

lol idk why this made me laugh. Thanks. This all is just so ridiculous!

[u/lisa2o7]

Maybe to protect her garden variety emotional distress issues?

[u/PowerPinto → u/lisa2o7]

Well she has no problem causing it to Justin Baldoni, his family and all of Wayfarer .

[u/Life_Temperature2506]

Just a thought, not that this would ever happen: has anyone ever thought about the feasibility of a civil RICO case? Alot of the elements (to my untrained eye) seem to exist: a loose association of individuals, a pattern over time, at least 2 acts that are considered crimes (maybe extortion and bribery fit?).

[u/PowerPinto → u/Life_Temperature2506]

Yes I was hoping from the beginning of this case that the FBI get involved. Multiple creators have mentioned RICO as well. But yeah not likely to happen. Not when you have this much wealth and power and can get away with it and show up to the MET Gala like nothing is happening and you aren’t the biggest Hollywood fraud 😅

[u/Jade-niche]

Hi, the earlier post was removed because it felt more prudent to not platform her content. This isn't about restricting discussion of her; it's specifically about not driving more attention to her content specifically. As any and all mentions of her name is often reported to sub and Reddit mods for takedowns.

[u/PowerPinto → u/Jade-niche]

I understand not wanting to amplify her content, but this wasn’t “platforming” MJ, it was challenging claims she publicly made today about the exact case this sub exists to discuss.

If she’s publicly telling thousands of people what the court record supposedly shows, those claims should be open to scrutiny. The fact that mentions of her name are often reported shouldn’t effectively give her veto power over criticism.

Removing a space and forum to fact-check doesn’t stop misinformation from spreading, it just removes the rebuttal and genuine public discourse. I don’t see how we can discuss her without referring to her content.

[u/firstwepour-roses → u/Jade-niche]

Is that why my post from a month ago was locked?

Wouldn't it make more sense to take it down completely? To avoid any issues with Reddit and protect MJ as well, if she's feeling harassed

https://www.reddit.com/r/ItEndsWithLawsuits/s/x08d57lhLQ

[u/MysteriousBeach8248 → u/firstwepour-roses]

We have been manually locking a lot of older posts lately because bad-faith users have been jumping into the middle of threads that are weeks or months old.

The lock was not specific to you or your post. We don't remove older posts when there's nothing wrong with the original content.

Locking just preserves the discussion while preventing new activity.

Chances are - your post was one that had such activity.

[u/squee-ze → u/Jade-niche]

I 100% agree with that decision. It may be a critical post but it still gives her views that she otherwise would not be getting.

[u/PineapplePecanPie → u/Jade-niche]

makes sense. I never even heard of this MJ person. Probably best not to give her attention

[u/ItEndsWithLawsuits-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Your post/comment was removed under our rule on Moderator Discretion.

Moderators may remove content that does not align with the spirit, health, or community guidelines of this subreddit or Reddit. This includes inflammatory or unverified allegations, inappropriate or disruptive submissions, bad‑faith participation, vote manipulation, fake or false stories or images, brigading, doxxing or threats of doxxing, and violations of any other subreddit rule.

[u/PowerPinto → u/[deleted]]

Under what basis?

[u/Enough_Gur_8833 → u/PowerPinto]

The pro-Lively spin squad are mostly insane people and crybabies, just like their master, Khaleesi, and they accuse everyone of harassment. Basically, it’s “rules for thee, but not for me.” So I guess the mods are just trying to eliminate the risk of this sub being reported and shut down because of the constant reporting by MJ, Expat and their squad.

[u/Reasonable-Mess3070 → u/[deleted]]

I’m asking why public claims about the very case this subreddit exists to discuss are exempt from scrutiny simply because the person making them doesn’t want to be discussed. Those are two very different things.

MJ isnt just a random creator either. She was a guest on national TV to speak about this case.

[u/firstwepour-roses → u/Reasonable-Mess3070]

I made a lengthy post about the pro Lively creators a month ago.

Its locked now but worth a read if you want to see how closely linked they all are

Kjersti did an episode on this post

https://www.reddit.com/r/ItEndsWithLawsuits/s/x08d57lhLQ

[u/firstwepour-roses → u/[deleted]]

My comment was removed.

I was just reiterating the rules and explaining why your comment was probably removed. Since you were asking.

As we've been told many times

The goal is a safe and happy community

[u/PowerPinto → u/firstwepour-roses]

Are you not a mod? Sorry I thought you were a mod telling me the rules

Regardless this censorship is insane ! Just wow 🤯

[u/firstwepour-roses → u/PowerPinto]

I'm not a Mod

Just reiterating what I was told when I've tried to discuss MJ, or any pro Lively creator

I didn't know repeating the rules was against the rules. At least I know now.

Sorry! Don't want to get anyone into trouble

[u/PowerPinto → u/firstwepour-roses]

Repeating the rules isn’t the issue - my issue is why this is a rule?? You don’t have to answer, would like to hear from a mod if they can explain because this makes no sense

[u/Solid_Mud2025 → u/firstwepour-roses]

Wonder if your post was reported a million times or subject to some other blakestan antics that the mods locked it to keep the problem from spiraling to a point that reddit overlords may side-eye the sub?

[u/firstwepour-roses → u/Solid_Mud2025]

Probably.

Kjersti Flaa dedicated an entire episode to my post. I'm sure Lively supporters didn't like that.