I disagree.

While I absolutely question the carnivore diet as a general thing, the way the community is handled has shifted from the way it started. Back in the beginning, I was in the same frame of thought you are, and said so directly in the community (eventually).

But jet in specific, and other users, have shifted to better citations, and a more frequent way of presenting their opinions. I do not believe they engage in misinformation currently. If I believed so, I would be obligated by my personal ethical code to attempt to have admins shut it down. Can’t say it would succeed, but I’d have to try.

Since jet in specific is very good about putting in disclaimers that people should approach the diet with care, I definitely can’t call it bad faith. Acknowledgement of the diet being limited in scope for the general population is good faith discussion by default.

Again, I definitely disagree with the claims made by some of the people in linked videos. What they recommend doesn’t match current best practices, and is usually extrapolated from data that is specific to limited circumstances and applied generally, which is very flawed. There’s also non medical issues with attempting a pure carnivorous diet, but I doubt those would be relevant to this.

As such, I still maintain that down voting everything willy nilly is a justifiable reason for bans, which is what this community is about.

If you feel that the community is dangerous, harmful, or otherwise shouldn’t be accessible, throwing down votes at everything is not the appropriate method to address the issue. And that’s what the post was about, not whether or not the community should exist. If you genuinely feel that strongly about the dangers involved, you should be contacting the admins of the instance and explaining that to them.