this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2023

6 points (87.5% liked)

Lemmy.ca Support / Questions

518 readers

1 users here now

This community is for support requests specific to lemmy.ca.

If you need to contact an admin privately, please message @[email protected].

If you are a technical user and you have questions or need support with the Lemmy software itself, please visit [email protected].

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

No bigotry rule? (lemmy.ca)

submitted 2 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

45 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Hello,

I was wondering how this rule is enforced.

top 38 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Unless I misunderstand (I'm merely a mod):

Users enforce as layer one. Through voting, reporting to mods. You can @ me in any thread in the communities I moderate, or send me a private message, for example.

Mods enforce as layer two, within their communities. Mod tools are not awesome (well, neither were reddits, so...). I regularly scan through the communities I moderate just looking things over. A good way to find problematic things is to sort by "New Comments".

Mods hosting communities on the server are subject to the rules that the admins set and enforce. So layer three -- if the mods are not doing their job, you go to the admins. Admins admonish the mods, or ultimately, remove their power and/or community.

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

FYI as admins, we actually see all reports that go to mods too. It's a little bit annoying, everything just goes into one big "reports" page. The mod tools definitely need work.

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

I've been thinking of trying my hand at some mod tools using what I know of the public APIs. But I suspect that the true solution is to learn rust so I can contribute directly to lemmy itself. Not enough hours in the day haha :)

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

Yeah I'm in the same boat. Would like to see some features but haven't done rust before, and not tons of free time!

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

accountable moderation is a rare bird

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I simplify it to two rules in my communities.

Don't be a dick.
The mod(s) have the final say.

That covers everything.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

...until you have two mods.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

Nope. It won't be a problem.

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

Or have a need to be accountable to your community.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

Nope. Rule 99.

[+] [email protected] -7 points 2 years ago (2 children)

@MapleEngineer

It depends on how you define “don’t be a dick”. Marxists, of which there are many in the lemmyverse, brand everything with which they disagree as “fascist”, i.e. “being a dick”.

cc: @samael

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yeah, one look at your banner, and it's very clear that you're willfully obtuse in this regard. Someone else's humanity, and right to live freely and peacefully without harassment, isn't up for debate. The line is pretty easy to identify- "am I dehumanizing someone?", and if you struggle with that, this isn't the space for you. If you embrace christofascism, expect pushback.

[+] [email protected] -6 points 2 years ago (2 children)

@oneofthemladygoats

Trying applying those principles to unborn babies and I won’t think you’re a hypocrite. I don’t mind push back but what I most often encounter from Marxists is censorship. I think deep down they realize that when subjected to reason, their ideology fails.

cc: @MapleEngineer @samael

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago (3 children)

I was referring to your obvious bigotry towards trans and queer people, but clearly there are all sorts of problems with christofascist views, thanks for highlighting that for me ;) lol at your mentions of "ideology" while simultaneously repeating old canned talking points from alt right propaganda.

No one owes you a platform. In fact, christofascists and those who break the treaty of tolerance very much deserve to be deplatformed. Your views aren't based on reality or evidence, and only serve to dehumanize.

And FYI, since you brought it up, abortion is a medical procedure that is between a patient and their doctor. A retired "Christian" Navy vet who supports Desantis is the absolute LAST person whose opinions should be respected on that subject.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Everybody has a right to their opinions, whether they be Marxist, Conservative or Born Again Christian. We should respect that, regardless if you agree with them or not. Generation Z and others have too many feelings, but not enough life experience. Most of the world is conservative in views, whether we like it or not

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

Don't use the term, "alt right". They started calling themselves the "alt" right because they didn't like the word, "extreme". Call them what they are, right wing extremists, neo-fascists, and/or christofascists.

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

oh I hear you on that! that's why I never call them nazis either, there's far less semantic wiggle room in the term christofascist and it's a much better descriptor anyways for their chosen flavour of hate. I've never really given consideration to the "alt" descriptor before, food for thought and I appreciate it :)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

Yes. It's very important not to leave yourself open to pedantic arguments. Nazis are a specific flavour of fascist but not all fascists are members of the Nazi party. It also opens you to their throwing Godwin's Law in your face as though it should stop you from calling them Nazis. If that happens it's important to be able to quote Mike Godwin himself:

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

All the creatures we create are our children. All of them are owed their creator's unconditional love. But instead, you murder, butcher and eat them. Spare me your crocodile tears for all the babies you don't really give a shit about.

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

I'm a socialist libertarian. Disagreement is fine just don't be a dick.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

@MapleEngineer

“Socialist libertarian” sounds like an oxymoron to me. Please elaborate.

cc: @samael

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Capitalism is where the people do most of the work and the wealthy oligarchs/plutocrats get most of the benefit.

Communism is where the people do most of the work and the government/cleptocrats get most of the benefit.

Socialism is where the people do most of the work and the people get most of the benefit.

Libertarianism is FAR more closely aligned with socialism than it is with fascism. The fascists have just coopted libertarianism, Prosperity Libertarianism, to say, "I've got mine, fuck you."

I want the smallest government possible to effectively run the country. I want the government to leave me the fuck alone and not tell me who I can love, fuck, or marry, how I can dress, what I can and can't do with my body, what I can eat or drink or smoke. I want a government that works FOR the people not against them. I don't want the government and the police to be the enforcement arm for corporations and the wealthy. I don't want corporations writing laws to benefit them at the expense of the people. I don't want the government propping up corporations. If they fail, they fail and another will rise to take their place. If it's a better it will succeed and survive. If not it will fail and be replaced again. I want unions everywhere. They protect workers and increase productivity.

I'm also smart enough that the only solution to a social problem is a social solution. The US government has spent more than $1.5 trillion dollars since 1976 fighting the "war on drugs" and drugs won. All the war on drugs did was make a bunch of rich people richer.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You don't just get to redefine things to suit your ideology.

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

What do you think I'm redefining? The right always points to Marxism for its example of socialism. Marxism and socialism are VERY different. Is Sweden a Marxist society? Norway? Finland? Canada?

socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it.

I don't know about you but I believe that everyone SHOULD be entitled to a share of what they produced. Taking what they produce and giving it to an oligarch who gives them a pittance in return sounds very much like theft to me.

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

I don't know whether you're being disingenuous when you play dumb about redefining things that you don't like and using loaded language, or if you're just that far gone. Either way... I'm the stupid one here for engaging in the first place.

Then you go off on a bunch of ideological shit that I never said thing one about. You're arguing with the voices in your head again.

I've seen the stupid shit you say before, but I won't in the future. Problem solved.

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

Why are you so upset? You seem to be the only person here hurling insults. Perhaps you need to do a bit of self-reflection.

Maybe start here. The only person trying to redefine socialism is you. You're using the One True Scotsman fallacy to try to define all socialism at Marxism which is disingenuous.

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

apt user name, anyways, lol

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

Meh...they're predictably boring.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

@MapleEngineer

It seems to me that Socialism is predicated on theft, which Libertarians find abhorrent. Is there some cognitive dissonance going on here?

cc: @samael

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

How is it theft that the people who do the work enjoy the benefits of that work? Why should the wealthy get 99% of the benefit of the people's labour? That's theft. Libertarians DO find theft abhorrent but the people who call themselves libertarians now are Prosperity Libertarians who are to libertarianism as Prosperity Christians are to Christianity. They are NOT libertarians.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

@MapleEngineer

I think you have committed the “No True Scotsman” logical fallacy.

cc: @samael

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

I guess we're done then.

Have a good day.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 years ago

@MapleEngineer

Thanks for the conversation.

cc: @samael

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

Socialism is the belief that the product of labor belongs to the people creating it- Workers.

And not to the capital owners who contribute nothing to production.

In that frame of view, the Capitalists steal surplus value from the workers - The difference between wages and the value of product. And as such, taking back the means of production & the spoils of the capitalist parasites isn't theft, it's reclaiming of one's rightful property.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

@BloodForTheBloodGod

Capital can consist of saved earnings. It is OK to steal such capital?

cc: @MapleEngineer @samael

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

That's not what capital means. And frankly, the 0.0001% of the time when someone invests something they've actually earned, I don't care.

We reclaim the remaining 99.999998% of capital for the working class, and I think that's a solid place to start.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago

For the longest time, Libertarian was a polite word for Anarchist. Then it was stolen.

And Anarchists are socialists. Libertarian Socialism can then either be Anarchism, or it can be Socialism or Communism which is otherwise anti-authoritarian or skeptical of state power.

You could arguably label someone like Rosa Luxembourg a libertarian socialist.

load more comments