570
The mod banning these users is the same mod who made the posts they downvoted. This is mod abuse, turning the downvote button into an auto-self-ban button.
The message is "If you disagree with me, you will be banned"
Monitoring and banning users for using lemmy as intended to signal boost your opinion should be grounds to have all mod privileges removed. This behaviour undermines the integrity of the server and the wider fediverse.
Oh hi, this post is about me!
I'm experimenting with the moderation policy for niche communities described by @jet@hackertalks.com.
@TheDude@sh.itjust.works, do you have any issues with this?
Punishing users for their individual votes is mod abuse and vote manipulation. You are removing the voting rights of users who dislike your content.
The only acceptable grounds for banning a user based on their votes would be using a sock puppet to vote on a single post or comment multiple times.
If people think your posts are shit, they should be allowed to express that without fear of phantom banning. Suck it up, or delete your account.
What about if someone entered the community to mass downvote everything? Or did so every day?
If I made a metal music community, and an account came in every day to downvote every post because they don't like metal - would I be justified in banning them for that?
That's fine, if the post is legitimately popular, the upvotes will outweigh the downvotes. That's how all of this works, and how it has always worked.
No, that would be an abuse of your mod powers. Conversely, how many downvotes do you think a user should be allowed before you can ban them for disagreeing with you?
No, this doesn't apply to small and growing communities. Or niche communities of specific interests. When I started up my community, many posts wouldn't get many votes - and an early downvote or two could easily sink a new post from trending at all, leaving it to languish to nowhere.
Based on what?
It's not about numbers specifically. People downvote in my community now - and I see the same names whenever I check from time to time, but they also upvote and contribute - so I am not that bothered. I have only banned a handful of users for this behaviour since I started. Each one of them did nothing but downvote everything, and never contributed at all to the community.
Downvotes are a contribution, they are just the kind of contribution you don't like. based on this, I don't think you area good fit for modding; you should probably look to pass your role on to someone who can moderate responsibly.
I fail to see the valuable contribution of an account that has literally never posted on the community they are downvoting in, never even posted on the fediverse, quietly downvoting every single post in a community. It is nothing but vandalism that hurts the growth of new communities.
By your logic almost every single community moderator on the fediverse is not a "good fit for modding" because they too, will ban accounts for spam-downvoting on their communities.
Replying here as it's higher the thread , but the other person you were replying to just seems to be sealioning.
Also, a 3 months old account with 3 posts, 2 about moderation issues, seems like an alt looking to stir up drama.
very much seems that way
I think you've made my point for me. You should really find someone more emotionally stable to moderate your communities.
How on earth have I showed emotional instability?
And my communities are doing fine, thanks.
Absurd hypotheticals, loaded language, repeated block quoting, relying on anecdotes to add emotional weight to your opinion.
I just don't think you are impartial or thick skinned enough to be in charge of moderating conversation.
edit, cleaning up a grammar error :D
What hypothetical? Loaded language? What?
Block quoting? I just reply to longer post in chunks. How is that emotional instability?
You mean my own experiences as a moderator growing a community? What else should I rely on here?
How have I showed any sensitivity at all?
I think we're done here.
I mean you are the user who took the conversation closer to being personal, not me.
You can add extremely defensive to that list I made a few comments ago.
I think it's quite reasonable to object to being personally attacked based on different opinions on public voting and community policies surrounding it.
It would be, if that was what was happening. This, however, is you throwing a hissy fit because you don't like my "opinions on public voting and community policies surrounding it".
This is not the kind of behaviour I would expect from anyone entrusted with the power to exclude people from the conversation.
Please pass your moderation privileges along to someone more appropriate for the role. Thanks.
How am I throwing a fit?
And it what happened with me, and my community. I only banned serial downvoters who had never participated in it, or in many cases - had a single post on the Fediverse.
They were quiet background downvoters.
My communities are fine with no problems.
Additionally, I don't answer to you.
You can literally view the public modlog of the communities I moderate, if you want to scrutinise my behaviour.
I have - why do you think I've been advising you to step down?
What particular actions do you disagree with?
You are bad at moderating. And apparently you get bored and lock threads when you have to do your self appointed job.
You enjoy the power, but you balk at doing the work.
You do realise most communities ban accounts for mass-downvoting, as I said to you before?
Secondly, that locked thread was a constant barrage of back and forth insults despite me mediating multiple times. How on earth is that power-tripping? I specifically locked it at the time because if it continued, I would've ended up having to ban multiple accounts.
Also you badger and pester users who disagree with you, which is extremely unprofessional conduct for someone in a place of even minor authority.
You reply to me (especially if you hit me with accusations), I'll usually reply back.
As I said, you are not stable or emotionally mature enough to be running a lemonade stand.
So just personal insults now basically.
No, this is my observation based on this conversation.
You are not emotionally equipped to be in a position of authority. That's not an insult, that's my opinion, and one which I have exhaustively outlined and is borne out by this very conversation.
Please stop clutching pearls, it is not an adequate response to my pointing out your history of unprofessional behaviour.
Behaviour that is completely ordinary for most community moderators across the Fediverse. If you object to how I moderate then you would also object to more-or-less every community moderator.
"The other children are doing it too"
My point is that you have serious issues with the fundamental governance of the entire Fediverse. I mean you even took grievance with locking a thread that fell into back and forth mudslinging over multiple days. That's a completely normal moderator practice.
Okay. A day old. Of people hurling insults at each other despite me intervening two or three times asking them to stop. My inbox filling up with reports. What's the problem with locking it?
That was a lie you just knowingly told. Why should I trust or listen to anything else you have to say?
You can literally observe the thread and see the deleted comments, and see them in the modlog.
Sorry I just think moderators shouldn't tell lies to retroactively justify their poor behaviour. I think that is a disqualifying action and should not be considered acceptable behaviour from anyone in a position of authority.
Please find someone more trustworthy to pass your moderation privileges to.
You don't know that I was lying. Does it make a difference if the thread was 2 days old as opposed to 1? What "poor behaviour" would this even be in aid of somehow justifying?
Again: What is the problem with locking a thread that has fallen into back and forth insults?
The point is you stretched less than one day into multiple days because you are aware your actions are not justifiable, so you knowingly lied to make yourself appear more reasonable.
You are not a good faith actor, please leave me alone. Also quit your moderation roles.
How do you know this? How do you know I didn't misremember? And why would me claiming it was 2 days old, as opposed to 1 - from your perspective - make it somehow more justifiable?
And again: What is the problem with locking a thread that has fallen into back and forth insults?
You are welcome to stop replying.
Because the screenshot was just above, in the comment chain you were replying to. I assume you are lying, because the alternative would be to accuse you of being a fucking moron, and I prefer to assume competence.
Thanks, I will! Feel free to respond to this comment tho; I wont read it, but as with every other reply you have made in this thread, it will add to the mountain of evidence that you are not emotionally mature enough to be moderating anything.
have a great day and quit your role as moderator because you are fucking dreadful at it lol! :D
The timescale didn't click with me when I saw the screenshot. I of course do recall locking the thread at the time, but the timescale details were gone. This is a small detail. What is the issue with locking a thread that has collapsed into bickering and insults?
I think we'll let the audience decide that.
And I'm absolutely fine as a moderator.
and we allow rules in comms that ban certain types of contributions, like propaganda outlets, low value sources, *phobia
in general, not allowing contributions that moderators believe is bad for the health of the comm is an acceptable policy
You're actively arguing for vote manipulation on the part of moderators.
I think its justified for community moderators to ban an account that never interacts on their community, and downvotes everything. I think it's not justified for community moderators to ban an account just for a single downvote on any thread.
I think if there's a serious problem, people can either make their own version of the community on another instance (a perk of the fediverse) and lead people away from the problem community to there, or pressure the instance owner in which the community is based - to remove them (another perk of accountability that doesn't exist in the same way on Reddit).