It’s not fun interacting with them when they often want to engage in ad hominems. This is why I have no interest in the tankie triad.
It’s not fun interacting with them when they often want to engage in ad hominems. This is why I have no interest in the tankie triad.
What, in your opinion, makes us “tankies” from what you just said? Respect for the neopronouns, intolerance towards Genai-hater trolls, or mod actions towards someone who went on a harassment campaign towards one of our users?
Anarchists always had very similar critiques towards capitalism as Marxists. Where we differ is what we do about it, and these actions is what can label someone a “tankie”
I didn’t say you were tankies, I actually said you were not. I just said something weird was going on with dbzer0. Your comment here, I say without really meaning any hostility by it, is more weird stuff.
Every single one of the issues you’ve listed, you’ve reframed it into something different than it was. Neopronouns were never the issue, it was blahaj shielding a transphobic troll from criticism and banning people who complained about them (complained about them while using accepted pronouns, usually while explicitly saying ‘yes I’m fine using people’s pronouns’), purely because the troll cleverly decided to involve neopronouns into the issue. And then pretending that anyone who was on the “enemy” side was obviously a pronoun-hater and that was the entirety of the issue.
Intolerance towards genAI-hater trolls was never the issue, it was random mod actions against people who were not genAI-hater trolls. And then pretending that anyone who got the random unwarranted mod action was probably a genAI-hater troll.
Both of those are the dishonest framings that the people defending whatever weird decision love to use. And, no matter how often it’s pointed out to them that some other people disagree with their framing, they simply ignore it, as if the person hadn’t said anything at all, and repeat the framing that conveniently makes their answer the only possible answer. That is textbook tankie-instance behavior. It’s part of what makes them insufferable to try to talk with. Even if your politics are clearly not tankie.
And, of course:
Aha!
“One of our users.”
That’s the root of the issue, to me. You’re starting to treat “your users” differently than other users.
One of your users spent part of yesterday following me around and replying to me in a few different threads demanding that I take part in an argument I’d already addressed and then told them I wasn’t interested in continuing. Is that harassment? No, because it’s your users.
There’s this massive thread accusing PugJesus of all kinds of stuff: That he’s pro-Israel, that he’s a terminally online weirdo loser, that he never backs up anything he says, that he bans anyone who criticizes Israel, that he’s transphobic and doesn’t respect people’s pronouns, that he’s a twat, and so on. That’s completely fine, because he’s a “lib.” He’s the enemy. We can all yell at him, insult him, nothing needs to be justified, it’s a big hateful groupthink that defines things in terms of enemies (and a crucial part is twisting things around so that someone can be defined as a horrifying enemy in some way, which is why they’re pretending he is pro-Israel) and in-groups. Why is that all okay? Because he’s not one of your users. He’s the out-group, he is a liberal apparently.
In some forums, that kind of thing is disallowed. If you make personal attacks or insults, you get mod action. If you pretend someone said something they didn’t say to stir up shit, you get mod action. Ada’s description from a different domain was actually pretty good: There are certain types of respect that are not “a reward for good behaviour.” They’re just what we need to do for each other to keep the community on the rails. On most of Lemmy, the mod action for violating that kind of respect is overtly one-sided; if you’re in the in-group, it’s allowed, if you’re aiming it towards the in-group, then you get mod action because it’s a crisis.
Does that one-sided moderation, and officially badjacketing people as “Zionists” and genocide supporters and then going full-bore against them as a result, mean you’re tankies? Not in the literal sense, no. But you’re starting to act like the tankie instances, all of a sudden, when it seems to me like you used to be chill and sensible. You had your politics but you weren’t dishonestly attacking and moderating against anyone who had some different kind of politics, and mobbing up against them like Lord of the Flies. Now it seems like you are, and it happened (from my POV at least) all of a sudden out of nowhere, and it’s weird to me.
(Yes, I know what badjacketing means. I placed it in the sentence the way I did to make a point.)
I disagree with your framing. I think you’re being dishonest in your framing on what caused the mod actions. At the end of the day we and Ada are beholden to our respective users, and as it turns out, they think those were the right choices.
And yes, we’re going to take action about harassment of our own users, that’s the duty of an instance admin. I want to point out however that all this brouhaha is over a 7days ban. Literally the mildest of punishments ever, and you’re at the point of pondering what’s rotten in the whole instance and writing walls of text, over a short term “chill out” ban.
I can’t count how many times someone on or off blahaj tried to explain that Dragonrider’s trolling, encouraging other users to suicide, things like that, were the core of the issue. If you really want to join Ada in pretending that there’s a whole Lemmy population that’s just frothing at the mouth to dictate to other people what pronouns they can and can’t use, and that was what got them heated up about Dragonrider and nothing about any of the other stuff, I won’t stop you. I started to dig up old messages to put together a timeline, but then I realized I don’t care and I think the issue is pretty clear enough already.
This was pretty much my point. lemmy.ml and Hexbear love how their admins behave, and that’s all the admins feel like they need to know. My point was that (a) you’re starting to operate along the same lines, it looks like, and (b) that’s not always a good thing.
Personally, I don’t care about the ban itself. I actually agree with you that PugJesus making a whole community to whine about how unfair it is is kind of childish. I care more about the bullying and fact-free mentality, that big thread with people making up nonsense about the target of the day.
Honestly, I think calling what’s ongoing “bullying” is kinda strange. If anything we wanted to cool the situation down.
I would rather show me which admins are more centered on what every rando on the internet thinks. Then I can point you to someone about to have a burnout.
Quotes from the thread:
And so on. There’s plenty more, that’s just what I had patience to dig up.
Those aren’t the only two options lol. I’m just saying that “Our users/tribe love that we always take the side of our users/tribe no matter the facts of the situation!” isn’t the good justification that it sounds like, when you phrase it differently than I just did.
Not sure which thread you mean, but If you think people expressing their low opinions about someone is “bullying”, then, well you haven’t experienced bullying. And also, what the hell do you expect of dbzer0 admins to do about people expressing such opinions? You want us to go around protecting the people you like from public opinion? Like, this is a legit absurd argument path.
It’s easy to look right when fighting against strawmen.
You just asked for examples of bullying, so I provided. What did you expect me to bring up, was someone sneaking through his window and punching him in the face? I’m not sure what other than personal insults could be meant by that. If it was bringing up examples of wrong things he did, then sure. Some people did that, some people lied about it (claiming he’d said one thing when he’d said the exact opposite), some people actively refused to provide any evidence but just threw insults at him and then peaced out. The first thing, I’d have no problem with, the others I feel like are worth worrying about at least a little bit.
I want you to stop protecting the people you like from public opinion. I’m completely fine with everyone just being able to have their say, although maybe certain levels of personal abuse shouldn’t be tolerated. But it’s very clearly one-sided. The dbzer0 people have been describing downvoting as “abuse,” so yes, I would say aiming extensive cursing and personal insults at someone and accusing them of things they didn’t do can be “bullying,” or at least something that’s worthy of mods weighing in on it, like they would pounce instantly if someone said something about Sam Altman or something.
Edit: Actually, maybe a better way to explain it: Go back to every one of the quotes I listed about PugJesus. If people came into a dbzer0 thread and said the exact same types of things about Ada, would that be okay? Or would it be a problem that required mod / admin attention?
That’s what bugs me about it, it’s the blatant tribalism of it. You permabanned a trans person just recently because they tried (again, for the thousandth time) to explain what the issue was with Dragonrider, and you didn’t like that, so ban for “pissy.” They’re not in the club, so fuck them. Everyone got all up in arms about ban reason “tankie,” but you’re fine with a comment being removed for the reason “shut the fuck up, liberal” (I actually 100% agree with removing the actual underlying comment – my point is that the slurs are starting to be celebrated, and only go one way, and that’s not a good thing.)
One of your people has just recently invented a new slur (“slopper”) to use to attack people they disagree with as they are being banned. I have no idea the context or what it means, although I can guess.
You get the idea. I don’t want to go back and forth about extensively. I have no idea how much of this is you, or the admin team, or whoever. I actually think probably most of what I see as most worrying is not coming from the admin team. But the culture shift is alarming to me. It’s all about attack, slurs, new fun insults. We need to protect “our users” against downvotes. Other users, on other instances, who got rando-banned, well, fuck them, they’re not “ours,” so who cares.
You get the idea. Maybe not. Anyway, that’s what I think about it.
Why yes, we do tolerate people badmouthing Ada, dessalines, nutomic, and even our own admins. Hell I’ve personally tolerated dozens of angry hexbears trying to bully myself in my own thread in my own comm. We do indeed walk the walk.
There’s no “tribalism” here, no matter how much you keep repeating it. In all honestly it reads to me you’re more upset people are not sufficiently polite in disagreement. Anarchists can and will be rude, especially towards people like PJ routinely but politely calling them “nazis” for not engaging in the electoralism farce. Nobody is under any onus to remain polite to spare your feelings, nor does this make is a “tribe” because we tend to attract anarchists who feel the same way about liberals.
Fuck I don’t even know at this point what your problem even is, that we attract like-minded people in our instance? We don’t want to be lemmy.world for a reason and if you want that, well lemmy.world already exists.
Seriously, We’re not going to go around policing people for rudeness. This is absurd and will not work whatsoever.
How about denial of UN-verified sexual assault because it happened against Bad Camp?
It’s like nuance doesn’t exist.
Yes, there were a lot of false accounts of rape on October 7th that were obviously framed based on hateful stereotypes intended to dehumanize. There were also actual rapes that did happen. But to some people everything is black and white and all they care about is whoever is on their ‘side’.
You’ll need to supply evidence for those claims. Creating false accounts of rape is very serious.
https://apnews.com/article/israel-palestinians-un-rape-oct7-hamas-gaza-fe1a35767a63666fe4dc1c97e397177e
The exaggerated and fictional accusations of rape are serious, like the parading through the streets nonsense.
There is footage of them parading through the streets with the hostages and dead.
Stop denying that Hamas raped innocent civilians. They did, they confessed to it, multiple organisations have verified it, victims have come forth with evidence, and they even filmed themselves.
You are replying to a comment that supports the fact that rape did occur as part of the Oct 7th attack.
Are you not able to understand that they both did rape and ALSO that Israel greatly exaggerated it with false claims to dehumanize?
Can you provide evidence for that?
Your mind is clearly made up already, but here’s an easy to find article that covers exactly what I’m talking about.