183
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2024
183 points (100.0% liked)
Ye Power Trippin' Bastards
527 readers
12 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.
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 4 months ago
MODERATORS
The users are taking issue with the admins falling for the troll and allowing the troll to make the space hostile. Their engagement is with the admin/mod response, not with the user.
If you genuinely believe dragons are real and they are able to type and have some understanding of the English language, go gather the data, get it peer reviewed and objectively verified, and go collect your Nobel Prize. Otherwise, if you occupy a space in which people must act as if dragons or Santa or Groot are real, that is an improv roleplay in which failure to say “Yes, and” is a bannable offense. Reality persists. Eppur si muove.
By using that adjective, you are implying there are creatures which do not exist. You’re defending the admin response by partaking in the same act which got the users banned.
Why are you hung up on the "dragons aren't real" thing? That was never a requirement. Some people will argue that being trans isn't real, being plural isn't real, being genderfluid isn't real, being bigender or another gender entirely isn't real. (Not that you are claiming this.) As such, the admins there simply decided that there won't be a line drawn. Let people do what they want. Heck, you could consider it "roleplaying" if you're more comfortable with that, or alternatively, simply don't engage. It's disrespectful and not to mention disruptive to make it an issue.
It was never a requirement that serious expressions of identity be real?
Yes. Them's the rules on Blåhaj Lemmy.
I mean, apparently so, but I was not operating under the assumption that "We don't believe in gender, this is all roleplay" was the base state of the instance, and many others seem surprised by it too.
Three feet to your right is "trans women are roleplaying women". You may not hold that view explicitly, but the rules around respecting identity in that instance exist for that reason. And that means accepting identities that are challenging, even if they are being used by shitty people.
It's not about the person being shitty, it's about the identity itself being absurd and contradictory to reality.
You missed the point of the comment you're replying to. To a lot of people, garden-variety binary trans people are "absurd and contradictory to reality". To even more people, nonbinary people are.
Blahaj lemmy's admins have decided that they will not draw a line, because they don't want to be the arbiters of what is valid. That does mean some extreme cases don't get decided the way you would, and that's fine! Just block those cases.
Whatever identity they have, I don't care. The internet's big enough for everyone. It's not my problem, not my life, live and let live.
You're so close to getting my point. It's like right there.
"Transphobes hate trans people because they don't think trans people are real; therefore, in order to not be transphobic, you must admit reality doesn't exist" isn't very compelling.
Most ordinary folk would opine that transphobia is bad precisely because trans folk do exist in reality and are valid.
They're exactly the opposite of what he just said.
What part of the removed comments do you think was considered gatekeeping by the admins, if not the statements that dragons aren’t real?
Then any interaction in that superposition of reality and fiction is pointless. Acknowledgment of reality will be arbitrarily censored, such as above. It ceases to be roleplay and becomes a localized Ministry of Truth with the admins kowtowing to the trolls.
People wanted to state the obvious about objective reality. Admin did not let them do that. People wanted to distinguish between reality and fiction. Admin did not let them do that.
Disrespectful to whom? Trolls? Reality?
By questioning the person's neopronouns, you're gatekeeping which identities or pronouns are acceptable. Nobody cares whether dragons are real or not. Many letters of the alphabet mafia have been questioned on whether they are real or not, and even continue to be, so over here, we're simply not doing that.
As for why you're being disrespectful: You broke the rules of the space and now you're making a big stink about it. Considering you're admitting yourself you think this person is a troll, I think it's time to admit your loss. You "fell" for them, got "tricked" into breaking a rule, and got banned as a result.
I’m not questioning the neopronouns. It’s an oversimplification to suggest that those are the singular reason people believe the account to be a troll and that is the same myopic reasoning I read from the admin. Read the troll’s directly harmful posts/comments and read between the lines on their more covert insidious posts/comments.
People caring about an objective reality is singularly why we’re having this conversation. The users were banned for stating that they aren’t real. Are you trying to troll me too or are you just not following any of this whatsoever?
None of that applies to me apart from me stating that the user is a troll. The banned users were not tricked; the admin was tricked into enforcing flawed rules to an absurd absolute. You likewise have been tricked into defending the absurd on moral principle rather than logic.
I didn’t ask why. I asked to whom. If I disrespect a troll, then good. If I disrespect those who choose to be gullible, then they shouldn’t have chosen to be gullible.
This is where we disagree. As far as neopronouns go, drag/drag is still pretty tame. It doesn't take a lot of effort to just go along with a persons preferred way of being referred to, in a space where doing so is expected. You're not supposed to decide on your own whether it's worth respecting depending on whether you think this person is a troll.
The reason? There's plenty of people out there, say on the spectrum, who often have trouble with being mistaken as a troll, for lack of being able to state their opinions and thoughts properly, or any other reason. I have personal experience with one such person. And their identity deserves to respected just the same as anyone else, even if their takes and opinions you are free to argue with.
Even if you know someone's obviously faking being trans (Josh Seiter comes to mind), it doesn't hurt anyone to just go along with using the pronouns they asked for, while criticizing them where it actually matters.
G*mer