this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2024
251 points (92.0% liked)

FediLore + Fedidrama

2159 readers
24 users here now

Chronicle the life and tale of the fediverse (+ matrix)

Largely a sublemmy about capturing drama, from fediverse spanning drama to just lemmy drama.

Includes lore like how a instance got it's name, how an instance got defederated, how an admin got doxxed, fedihistory etc

(New) This sub's intentions is to an archive/newspaper, as in preferably don't get into fights with each other or the ppl featured in the drama

Tags: fediverse news, lemmy news, lemmyverse

Partners:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Will it be effective?

SpoilerNo, it was not very effective.


EDIT: The banning event continues. Please consult the modlog to observe.

https://lemmy.world/modlog?page=1&modId=7121342

If you scroll down to about a day ago, you might be able to observe an emerging behavior from this mod.


EDIT 2: The mod in question moderates a total of 108 Lemmy communities. How deep does this conspiracy run? Is this mod a lost Redditor? More to come!


EDIT 3: The mod has now removed my comment all together, one might assume because it was still receiving upvotes in the 2 hours following my ban. Are there similarities here to Watergate? You be the judge!


EDIT 4: The mod in question has now been removed as a mod of the [email protected] community, as a result of their abuse of power.

https://lemmy.world/post/19731457

This was their response:


EDIT 5: This will be my final update, since as far as I see it, the issue this thread focuses on has been resolved. To quote Beaver herself in a very ironic comment she made directed towards someone else:

Clearly this was all just a case of...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 14 points 6 days ago (11 children)

Am I missing something here? The vegan community is for vegans and people to ask questions about being vegan but is not for debating about any part of being vegan. That is their rule 5, which I see people break every day thinking it is ok to shit all over vegans there. If you don't want to hear about vegans then block the community.

[–] [email protected] 46 points 6 days ago (2 children)

The problem is, in my opinion, that they post memes that are clerly provoking non-vegan people for discussion.

It's weird to jump under a "here are my 15 ways of cooking asparagus" post with anti-vegan content. But "look at these carnovorous clowns" memes are clearly offensive.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 days ago

Sounds like something a carnivorous clown would say!

(/s)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I don't think it's intended to provoke non-vegan people, I think it's meant to be a 'for us, by us' community. PSA to all: there's a block community button for communities that are not hateful or illegal (you should report those) but are things you'd prefer not to see on your personalized feeds

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)

That's what private communities are for. Calling people names while perfectly aware of it leaking into the public feed is a provocation. And it worked.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago

Private communities don't exist; you can only create an instance and defederate from everyone else. VeganTheoryClub is an instance which defederated from Lemmy.World, for example.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 5 days ago

I'm not sure what you're referring to re: name-calling tbh, and I think this thread is an overreaction, but I agree with you that non-private communities have some obligation to civility or something like that

[–] [email protected] 33 points 6 days ago (1 children)

but is not for debating about any part of being vegan

If that's the case, I want to know why perfectly innocuous comments are still removed. Seems like they operate on a whim.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 days ago

Depends on the context maybe? Idk I am not a mod. I've just seen comments about arguing for eating meat or saying something like "I'm going to eat 2 hamburgers now because of you" which are just annoying. I thought that was what this was about. I'll leave my comments up for anyone else confused.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

The mod isn't banning people for debating in the comments. A lot of people the mod is banning (myself included) are people who only downvoted posts. Considering that a large portion of the posts are blatantly antagonist things like this, it easy to see why they're getting downvoted. If you're going to insult 90% of the users on an instance, then you're going to get downvoted.

The mod could have made the community private so they could insult people without consequences, but instead, they decided to remain public while banning anyone who downvotes their insults. They want to continue to antagonize the instance while removing the instance'a ability to respond. They want to artificially lower the number of downvotes they get, so it doesn't look like their antagonistic bullshit is as unpopular as it is.

Everyone could block the community, and if you choose to do that, that's a reasonable response, but it shouldn't be the only response. We should be able to express our opinion about the content in our feeds, even if it's just downvoting it. Why should an entire instance be expected to hide from one abusive community?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 6 days ago

I think what you are missing is that they’re banning people for breaking Rule 5 that haven’t broken Rule 5.

Nobody is taking issue with them banning people that broke Rule 5.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 6 days ago (1 children)

This good advice. Everyone should block the community.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 6 days ago

If you don't want to hear about vegans then block the community.

Doesn't help much when one of their users is being so fucking stupid that news of it spreads across all of Lemmy.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 6 days ago

Rule 5 - This community is an echo bunker.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 days ago (1 children)

If they indeed promoted vegan diets for carnivores then I'm for a ban of the mod / community too. That's very much animal abuse.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I've responded to this before and no one cared but here is the original thread since everyone has greatly exaggerated what was said about cats who are obligate carnivores not obligated to eat meat per se.

https://lemmy.world/post/18691022

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Also the notion of “owning” another animal is speciesist.

I'm not sure I can take the people in that community and what they claim seriously.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I admit I have no idea how to respond to that. Every vegan has different views on their lifestyle. I have two dogs, they eat kibble that has meat in it (they are very picky idk if I can change them to a vegetarian kibble), I homemake simple peanut butter biscuit treats for them, and I brush their teeth with meat flavored toothpaste. This is ok to me but is probably out of line for others. Some vegans would never own a cat and would rather own a rabbit or guinea pig instead. This vegan believes more that we shouldn't have pets apparently. I don't have this view so I cannot defend it other than they are trying to reduce harm in their own way.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago

And they'd ban you for your opinion.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Consider the absurdity of that statement for a second.

How can a non-vegan ask a question about the lifestyle without engaging in a debate? How do you actively interact with information without debating it?

Debates don't have to be antagonistic. When both parties are genuinely interested in questioning their own values and opinions they can be incredibly rewarding. I can understand a rule against antagonism, but disallowing debates inherently precludes honest questioning for people interested in growing their knowledge on the lifestyle.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 days ago

The bans seem to be targeting downvotes without other contribution and cheeky comments such as the one in the OP

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 days ago

Well it gets fatiguing to debate all the time, especially when some people are just trolling. But you can ask questions like what do you do for protein, B12, iron, etc. without debating. What are some staples that vegans eat, is it easy to make vegan food, how expensive is vegan food, what does a balanced vegan meal look like, what are some recipes, etc. Even asking can a person thrive on a vegan diet through all stages of life and you'll probably be given an article or recommended to watch Game Changers.

I think they want to stop the antagonistic people, especially if all they want to do is say: it is only natural to eat meat/we evolved to eat meat, humans have dominion over animals, animals don't have feelings, vegans are just being overemotional aka only logical people eat meat, it is ok to kill animals, killing animals in factory farms is ok because it is efficient, there isn't enough land to grow vegan food for everyone, etc. Just shit that's been responded to a million times and at this point seems bad faith since it's been debunked before. Maybe they could have a sticky or wiki about these common arguments, idk I am not a mod.

It also matters what your tone is and that can be the difference between someone asking questions in good faith vs someone doing an antagonistic debate. But yeah at this point vegans do not need to question their values or opinions when it comes to their diet and lifestyle. You cannot convince a vegan it is ok to kill an animal for food but you might be able to convince a non-vegan it is wrong to kill an animal for food. Anyway that was just my thoughts on it.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 days ago

Many people see a post on All, never notice the community name, never read the sidebar, comment, and move on.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Thanks for adding context, I had no idea what rule 5 was.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 6 days ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 days ago

That rule seems very... Open to interpretation. Thanks for the info though.