this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2023
433 points (98.7% liked)

/kbin meta

110 readers
1 users here now

Magazine dedicated to discussions about the kbin itself. Provide feedback, ask questions, suggest improvements, and engage in conversations related to the platform organization, policies, features, and community dynamics. ---- * Roadmap 2023 * m/kbinDevlog * m/kbinDesign

founded 2 years ago
 

@ernest how do I report a Magazin on kbin.social ? There is a usere called "ps" who is posting to his own "antiwoke" Magazin on kbin.social. Please remove this and dont give them a chance to etablish them self on kbin.social. When I report his stuff it will go to him because he is the moderator of the magazin? Seems like a problem. Screenshot of the "antiwoke" Magazin /sub on kbin.social. 4 Headlines are visible, 2 exampels: "Time to reject the extrem trans lobby harming our society" "How to end wokeness" #Moderation #kbin #kbin.social πŸ“Ž

edit: dont feed the troll, im shure ernest will delet them all when he sees this. report and move on.

Edit 2 : Ernest responded:
"I just need a little more time. There will likely be a technical break announced tomorrow or the day after tomorrow. Along with the migration to new servers, we will be introducing new moderation tools that I am currently working on and testing (I had it planned for a bit later in my roadmap). Then, I will address your reports and handle them very seriously. I try my best to delete sensitive content, but with the current workload and ongoing relocation, it takes a lot of time. I am being extra cautious now. The regulations are quite general, and I would like to refine them together with you and do everything properly. For now, please make use of the option to block the magazine/author."

❀

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 95 points 1 year ago (3 children)

If there's more people here like 10A it would be great if you could speak up so I could keep building my block list

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's kind of impressive that that already have -2000 rep

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I just took a peek at that user’s profile. Saw what magazines they moderate. Not surprised we have a different point of view.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Yes, but m/FoxNews is not what you probably think it is.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think you're a malevolent, hateful, backwards bigot who shouldn't be welcome here... but I also genuinely appreciate the comedy in how you've been handling any references to your presence on m/FoxNews.

Fuck you, for sure, but also well done.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

Aww, shucks, that's the nicest thing anyone's said to me all day!

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

It's news about foxes, JUST AS I SUSPECTED

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Ok you got me there.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

The more people who will get on the platform the easier it will be to shut the intolerant and bullshitters out.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I've got a pretty good idea of what the "A" in "10A" stands for.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 56 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

You seem like the type of person who drives weirdly slow past preschools. It's always you types of fuckers projecting their shit onto people they want excuses to hate.

Trans people are pedos? Find me 10 articles of incidents of a trans person getting arrested for pedophilia in the last year.

I bet I can find 10 articles of priests and Christians raping kids in the past fucking month.

Quit projecting, get off the internet, look inward, and shut your fucking mouth.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 year ago

Please look up the facts. Doctors don't "cut off sex organs" or do ANY other physical changes to trans children.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Daily Mail
Fox News
NY Post
...And a Twitter account that doesn't link to a credible news source.

Would you like to try again without the sources that continually fail fact checks and exhibit a far right bias?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

How predictable. Do you have any actual arguments beyond smearing the sources? Don't believe your lying eyes, right? Can you point to any factual inaccuracies in the articles linked or does your reasoning end at "they report inconvenient facts that don't show up on the NYT/CNN/MSNBC/BBC front pages so they must be biased".

And here's the source for the tweet. Didn't take a whole lot of effort to find (not that you even bothered ofc): https://www.cronicaviva.com.pe/pnp-arresta-a-sujeto-vestido-de-alumna-en-colegio-de-mujeres-en-huancayo-videos/

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't have to; you have to provide good sources to back up your claim. If I say that god exists, and then claim that the bible proves is, well, I'm not proving my point because I haven't yet given any solid evidence to my claims. This is how a debate works when your arguing like a rational adult.

And, for the record, CNN/NYT/et al. are also biased, but they're (usually) more factually based. Bias is not the same as factually incorrect; bias is reflected in which stories you choose to report, and what language you use in reporting. And example of a source that would be both unbiased and highly factual would be Reuters News Service, or the Christian Science Monitor. Similarly, Jabocin is strongly left-biased, but also highly factual.

Three of the sources you cited are not credible because they continually play fast and loose with facts and don't bother verifying information. One of them was unsourced entirely, and the backup you provide is not in English--or based in the US--which makes determining the veracity difficult.

In short, you aren't acting in good faith.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

"not in English--or based in the US--which makes determining the veracity difficult."
Not my fault that you can't read Spanish, and are you seriously implying that a Peruvian source should be automatically regarded as dubious? Un gringo tipico...

"you aren't acting in good faith"
lol

I get that you'd like nothing but Pravda articles confirming that the revolution is going swimmingly, but when you can't even provide a single example of a factual inaccuracy in any of the articles provided it's really hard to take you seriously.

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

Sheesh, I know who that is already! I had them blocked ages ago. What a tool.