All from in this thread in [email protected] about a chant at a British music festival where an artist said “death, death to the IDF”.
After other users were quoting that chant in the comments and had comments removed and banned, the hero of our story, @[email protected] (appearing as “acargitz”) pointed out that under international law, fighting an occupying force is legitimate. But apparently not under world news rules, as their removed comments and the many explanations from mods make clear in the thread.
Equally against the rules is the call for the eradication of an organisation or business, even without an explicit call to violence against individual members of the business.
In the same thread: user @[email protected] had comments removed for being anti-American “(again)”, though I couldn’t see the first time. It’s not even clear to me how the removed comments were anti-American.
Bonus points for the “DC Comics” removal reason. Though this seems to be incompetence, rather than malice.
Well then i guess you’re just too cool for us. Why are you still here, though?
They can’t resist being a massive hypocrite about slapfighting.
Maybe. What creeps me out is the weird blind spot. Like they’ve got a commisar standing behind them or something.
Maybe it’s him doing an audition to finally be made full admin
I do get skeezy sociopath politician vibes.
Does fit well with the othet world admins
They love the attention?
People keep asking questions, I mean I could just ghost everyone, but again, seems rude.
So you don’t care at all, fuck our feelings, we have nothing meaningful to say, you’re just, like, a paladin of manners?
When your feelings are “I don’t care about your rules” then, yes, fuck your feelings. It’s not my job to pat your hand and go “Awww, it will be OK.”
But what are your rules? Because they are, comprehensively, not “no violence”.
I mean, it’s right there in the sidebar:
For !world it’s Rule 6:
“Rule 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.”
But your view on laws makes ‘no advocating violence’ really messy.
So what counts? Who and how is it okay to advocate viooence?
So some violence is clearly allowed.
Also, ‘no regarding the mods’. You’re unhinged.
Edit: ‘no advocating violence’ is an extremely radical position, and i think there’s violemce youre choosing to not see. Make it more explicit.
It’s not OK to advocate violence.
Essentially if someone actually acted on a lemmy post and committed murder, manslaughter, assault, arson, etc. etc. all the personal injury felonies? That’s advocating violence.
Cheering on violence commited by other people, all the “That person needs to be Luigi’d” comments, those get removed too.
Celebrating death is advocating violence. Like I said in another comment, that one was super hard to enforce when Kissinger died. I personally loved the “I finally got him!” meme, but it was borderline.
I dont think you understand how radical a position “no advocating for any violence ever” is. It’s one that i, in a variety of pretty radical spaces for my entire adult life, have only ever seen a handful of times, and even fewer from people i took seriously. I do not believe people when they say it, because in the overwhelming amount of cases, they are lying, and mean something else.
You aren’t acknowledging the violence that you endorse in this rule, you’re not counting it as violence, but the reader, who will be trying to vibe out the actual rules because they’re clearly not just as-written, will read yours, and detect that there is some amount, form, or subjects for violence that are acceptable.
Having a personalish conversation with you here, i thing i can get a sense of that, but it’s absolutely not explicit in the rules, and enforcing half-unwritten rules is thoroughly shitty. It’s reddit mod behavior. Isn’t doing better than that why you’re even here?
This is about 'why are you still in this thread, sorru, didn’t notice during initial response.
Yeah, getting a lot of replies in this thread. Hard to keep them all straight when my inbox says (21).
But yeah, as for why I’m participating here… That’s a longer story.
I was on reddit 15 years before it imploded and the #1 thing that chapped my ass were moderators who would do shit with no explanation.
Thread locked. Thread removed. Users banned. They literally felt (feel?) that they didn’t owe anyone an explanation. I resolved to do better, and the way I go about it is with transparency. I LOVE that lemmy moderation logs are public.
If I remove a post or a comment, you will be damn sure you know why I removed it. When a user gets banned, it should be clear to all involved why it happened.
PTB, for the most part, are the whiny little bitches who cannot stand that someone else dared to tell them “No.”
There are legitimate abuses of power, look at, well, almost anything .ml gets away with. If they were anyone other than the founding lemmy instance, they would have been defederated AGES ago.
But they still host valuable communities, so nobody wants to treat them the way we treated hexbear. I get it.
The DOWNSIDE is that by being more public facing than other mods, that makes me a target for harrassment.
Did you know, I have a personal troll who creates accounts specifically to attack me? They are hilariously bad at it and get instance banned within minutes, and they never seem to learn from their mistakes. Someday they’ll discover sex or something and will stop… someday.
Okay. So, last thing first, you know some people are asexual, right?
While it’s not common, it is entirely possible your troll will not discover sex, or will discover then dismiss it.
But your inability to acknowledge the violence you do endorse and allow in communities you moderate, while still banning even the faintest whiff of any other violence is kind of exactly like that
Well, I was going to say “someday they’ll discover masturbation” but they’re clearly already engaging in that. 😉
Removing comments and banning users isn’t violence, it’s good housekeeping. It’s also a requirement of modding a lemmy community.
Im not arguing that your moderation is violence. I dont think-this has been going a while and i have been on a very fun rainbow of drugs this week, so canmot confirm.
I’m saying that you advocate for violence, but a violence you refuse to acknowledge or punish others for speaking. It puts the lie to your rule, and leaves the rest of us fumbling to figure out the truth. Which is extra infuriating when you deny that there us such a thing.
A laudable goal. But one you are so clearly not actually attempting to live up to. If you were, you might have realised all the people telling you that you’re being a lower tripping hastard have a point.
You can’t ban a person for saying “get rid of genocidal institutions” and then claim it was a Just act on the basis of a no violence policy.
If you were a good mod, you’d say “mea culpa. I made a mistake. Let me reverse it and unban the user.” But you’re not a good mod, you’re a power tripping bastard who has doubled down every single time you get called out—except for all the times you’ve chosen to try to deflect the conversation into irrelevancy.
They don’t have a point. Look at their modlogs.
They are whiny kids, or people with the emotional intelligence of whiny kids, who just can’t stand authority and being told “No, you can’t do that.”
Lemmy has a large anarchic element, it’s really no wonder.
And compare what they’re saying with what you banned them for.
deleted by creator