Roger Broome won't post my polite comments which criticize his unfair comments on anti-natalists

This fellow Rodger Broome has posted a large number of videos about anti-natalism, and apparently has received quite a bit of criticism of them, which has led him to refuse to post comments on the videos when he judges those comments to be attacks.

In the third comment ever that I attempted to post to any of his videos, I was subject to this policy.  So I have posted my comment here for people to read, since I don't think it was any kind of unfair attack at all.  For the context, I include all the other comments before that, and his replies. (From this video: "myopic-pessimism")

My first comment was prompted by his apparent belief that anti-natalism could be dismissed because it was only advocated by people who could not think straight because they were depressed or otherwise mentally afflicted:

 I would like to know what you think of some of the academic philosophers who defend anti-natalism. Particularly the most well-known advocate, David Benatar. Do you think he likely to be suffering from an affective disorder of some form?  For starters, what is your impression of him from the radio interview available on youtube (google "david benatar radio interview".

He replied:

I don't know Benatar from direct observation. Also, I don't ascribe to the DSM diagnoses beyond their use as a nomenclature. But recently it has become more problematic. My video positions are not to diagnose or philosophically prove anyone is "mentally ill." I want AN folks to self-examine by posing the questions and reflecting what I have seen. Is Benatar depressed? Perhaps. I think, if I were to review his work, I would find him to have taken a materialist's view to its logical absurdity.

My reply, and second comment, prompted by his apparent lack of interest in even looking into what Benatar, probably the preeminent academic anti-natalist, has to say about it:

Sorry, didn't mean to imply you were attempting to diagnose, especially using DSM. I just meant comments of a kind like you have made in your earlier videos, whatever you want to call that.

This is an important issue, so could you listen to the short interview with him and give an opinion. Personally, I don't anti-natalism has any intrinsic connection to depression or materialism and its arguments have to be addressed directly.

He reply to my second comment:

AN is a materialist's positions because it starts with that stance that material is all that exists, see? There is nothing that suggests that it even leaves a metaphysical door open. So it exists as a presupposition and hidden premise, if it isn't explicated. I also disagree with its premise "all suffering is bad" and would submit to "some suffering is bad." Just like, I don't say "all ANists are depressed" but rather "the ANists I have observed on youtube seem depressed."

 
Rodger refused to post my next comment, and I did not save it, but I believe it was basically this:

Anti-Natalism does not start the stance that "material is all that exists".

And while I cannot recall exactly what you said in your videos in various places, I do see for example that in your blurb on your very first video you said:

Anti-natalism is not a philosophy but an outcry from those that suffer from depression, apathy, and learned hopelessness. Anti-natalists are stuck in their own existential crises and are looking for validation and some heroic answer.

Anti-natalism might be taken seriously as a thought project philosophically, once the prophets of this message are not solely those disenfranchised from society and terribly miserable in their own depression.

It seems to me that this is indeed making a general claim about anti-natalism and also about all anti-natalists.  

He refused to send me a copy of the comment so I cannot be absolutely sure, but I believe that is very close to what it was.   Certainly there was no intemperate language or insults or anything of the kind.

I don't believe there are any reasonable grounds on which to refuse posting it.