this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2025
125 points (89.8% liked)
Ye Power Trippin' Bastards
671 readers
241 users here now
This is a community in the spirit of "Am I The Asshole" where people can post their own bans from lemmy or reddit or whatever and get some feedback from others whether the ban was justified or not.
Sometimes one just wants to be able to challenge the arguments some mod made and this could be the place for that.
Rules
- Post only about bans or other sanctions from mod(s).
- Provide the cause of the sanction (e.g. the text of the comment).
- Provide the reason given by the mods for the sanction.
- Don't use private communications to prove your point. We can't verify them and they can be faked easily.
- Don't deobfuscate mod names from the modlog with admin powers.
- Don't harass mods or brigade comms. Don't word your posts in a way that would trigger such harassment and brigades.
- Do not downvote posts if you think they deserved it. Use the comment votes (see below) for that.
- You can post about power trippin' in any social media, not just lemmy. Feel free to post about reddit or a forum etc.
Expect to receive feedback about your posts, they might even be negative.
Make sure you follow this instance's code of conduct. In other words we won't allow bellyaching about being sanctioned for hate speech or bigotry.
YTPB matrix channel: For real-time discussions about bastards or to appeal mod actions in YPTB itself.
Some acronyms you might see.
- PTB - Power-Tripping Bastard: The commenter agrees with you this was a PTB mod.
- YDI - You Deserved It: The commenter thinks you deserved that mod action.
- BPR - Bait-Provoked Reaction: That mod probably overreacted in charged situation, or due to being baited.
- CLM - Clueless mod: The mod probably just doesn't understand how their software works.
Relevant comms
founded 5 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
you literally permabanned me because I said luigi then mentioned you have a bad source, lol. Can you power trip less?
...as opposed to you outright making it explicit your aim was violence?
It would be one thing if people complained about moderation but were fully transparent about all the things that went on from their end.
That was a bait though and he never explicitly called for violence.
Why are mods so inclined to waste their time doing this?
Hmmm
Even though he says so in the screenshot that's right there?
And why do you call it bait like that's a plus?
What does he actually say?
Mod said violence and he made a cheeky retort. Them he got sanctioned. That's what a bait looks like. Mod behavior was in bad faith here.
I will let others make their judgement call but this is a common tactic used by mods on world to censor unsanctioned opinions.
The speech in question didn't rise to threat of violence, just memeing Luigi. Y'all trying to make it into something it really wasn't to justify censorship.
Their house and their rules but people should be aware what they are dealing with. Seed lemmy.world is bad for free speech and hard hitting discussions that we as society face. Only neo liberal agenda is permitted. Classic wolf in sheep coat issue.
When a conflict is being resolved, the message, the intent, and the context are taken into consideration. So suppose you have someone "bait" and cause it to slowly escalate into something that breaks both TOS and several places' laws/rules and you do something about it, only for the same exact "bait" to show up elsewhere verbatim, initially with good faith taken into consideration but then with the "baiter" revealing he fully intends the thing the people enforcing the rules fear in the first place (which, yes, if you look at what happened, entailed the violence you are denying), ruling out any hope for intent, all while everyone is piling up on a thread that has little to do with the topic they are being passionate about in the first place. What, then, do you expect would happen?
"Free speech" is seldom considered to encompass conspiracy or encouragement/incitement to engage in lawbreaking behavior, both of which are against said laws in even the most free places. At that point, someone might as well argue spying on people is free speech, based on the same "everything goes" mindset that goes into the topic, but then (emphasis on "then") you run into the people who cite their freedoms while invalidating the law saying they have boundaries on what they consider to qualify.
What is the " law breaking" behaviour here again? Which law is broken?
Y'all need to get a lawyer because these appeals to authority while talking out of your is clowny.
It's not "appeal to authority" when what I'm speaking from is the TOS (which, if you think is clowny, you can leave this domain right now). The TOS is made by those who are rightfully in charge, having formed (or inherited) the instance with their own two hands. Calling it "appeal to authority" is like calling it appeal to authority to say you own a bike and that you prefer it to not be stolen because you are its owner, even if the TOS happens to have the same things in mind as the law, whose own enforcers have the power, good or bad, to shut the domain down. Murdering people is what we would refer to here as lawbreaking behavior (which I am surprised I have to specify as it has been against the rules in every place that ever existed, except for, ironically, Germany under the Axis Powers, so take that as you will), and by extension this casts a shadow over anything that invokes/tempts it. It's not rocket science.
You attempting to portray ocean's comment as a crime, which it is not.
At best, it is ToS violation which is fine but clearly public is not pleased with this modding behaivor and hence why we are documenting the bias on this topic here.
You have the right to mod as you please and general public has the right to know the weak underpinnings you are relying on to censor public sentiment
Cheers;)
Wow, maybe, just maybe I'm not the one in the wrong here. Neither ethics or law care about public opinion, right and wrong are still right and wrong. Your underpinnings are freedom (without regard for the laws that go with freedoms, or the freedoms of Brian Thompson, which are wrongly called "murder"), populism, and inaccuracies about what went down that day... basically a recipe for "it's acceptable because I want it to be". If it was about "public sentiment", there's a lot more you wouldn't see that you do, and there wouldn't be harassment sprees in places like the DM's to try to cope.
Showing your colors, mate, thank you.
Sensibility is not a color.