view the rest of the comments
World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
they haven't actually bombed al shifa, or any hospital for that matter.
okay, can you link any evidence of hospitals being bombed?
Can you open any news article not written by the IDF?
https://www.doctorswithoutborders.ca/gaza-attack-on-ambulance-outside-al-shifa-hospital/
Literally Doctors Without Borders explaining that an ambulance right outside the hospital was blasted during bombings.
I'll remark the words of the other user:
I mean, I read through what you posted and it literally never says Israel bombed hospitals.
HRW just cites a Tweet by “WHO in occupied Palestine” that is very non-specific while sounding specific.
The relevant bits from the Tweet used as the primary source by HRW:
“We are horrified at the latest reports of attacks on and in the vicinity of Al-Shifa Hospital, Al-Rantisi Naser Pediatric Hospital, Al-Quds Hospital, and others in Gaza city and northern Gaza, killing many, including children.”
“Over the past 36 days, WHO has recorded at least 137 attacks on health care in Gaza, resulting in 521 deaths and 686 injuries, including 16 deaths and 38 injuries of health workers on duty.”
If I thought I knew better from my seat in a chair what was going on in Gaza than the humanitarian organizations on the ground there then I would simply log off and touch grass.
I mean, when you are calling people liars because they don’t agree with you, especially when your own sources don’t support what you say, I’m pretty sure that’s a sign you need to log off and touch grass.
Is it possible Israel has bombed hospitals in Gaza? Certainly.
Did you provide proof? No.
Clearly the UNRWA and the doctors at MSF don't know what they're talking about. Only the IDF does.
Keep it civil. Removed.
Super cool how lying about hospitals not being bombed is "civil" but calling it out for the lie that it is somehow isn't.
Attacking the contents of an article is absolutely allowed, attacking other users is absolutely NOT allowed.
So in your comment:
"Liar. https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/11/14/gaza-unlawful-israeli-hospital-strikes-worsen-health-crisis"
That's fine. "Liar" is maybe a little strong, I personally would have allowed it, other mods may not have. Your mileage may vary.
It was the personal attack against the other user AFTER that where you crossed the line and caused the comment to be removed.
I disagree that saying someone is ignorant or that I would STFU if I was that ignorant is a personal attack. I also do not see how that is somehow more objectionable than lying about bombed civilians.
It's literally an ad hominem attack and is not allowed.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem
You've also been warned about this before according to the modlog (which is public information):
https://lemmy.world/modlog?page=1&userId=82695
If you keep it up, you're cruising for a temporary ban.
I haven’t received notifications for any of those other warnings as far as I can tell, the links in the log won’t actually load for me. I also stand by them and encourage everyone to check out my forbidden opinions. It’s hilarious that one of them is literally a single sentence of me asking a mod for clarification.
Btw, why is lying about murdered civilians fine but calling someone ignorant is beyond the pale?
Not all mods bother replying to comments they remove, I choose to because I believe transparency is an important part of moderation.
As to the question, engaging in personal attacks violates rule 5 in the sidebar (which I wrote BTW):
"Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (perjorative, perjorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (perjorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!"
Ok, I understand that your stance is that ignorance is not a neutral statement of fact but a personal attack, and I do appreciate you replying unlike the last mod I asked that just deleted my comment without answering. Which I also had no idea about because I don’t monitor the mod log of every place I comment.
It’s just a really awful policy for the exact reason I’ve been underlining over and over: if polite lies about mass murder are fine and calling someone ignorant for saying heinous shit isn’t fine, you’re just creating an environment where impoliteness is worse than bigotry. And yeah I see the rules against that, doesn’t seem to be doing anything about the overt lie that hospitals haven’t been bombed.
“It’s the rules” is a terrible justification for leaving up lies about mass murdered civilians as long as they’re polite.
If the facts are on your side, I absolutely encourage you to refute incorrect information, just don't attack the other user in the process.
"I'm sorry, you're wrong. - Link."
"Reality disagrees. - Link."
That's all cool.
Ad hominem attacks cross the line. When you start going after the other user, that's a problem and we don't want flamewar threads top to bottom. That's why the rule exists.
If you don't want flame wars then removing obvious flame bait--like lies about mass murdered civilians and hospitals not being bombed--would go a lot farther than deleting everyone that calls that shit what it is.
I've explained the mod position multiple times. It's not up for debate. You're now starting to shade over into a different form of disingenuous argument affectionately called "sealioning".
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning
From here:
https://wondermark.com/c/1k62/
Don't argue with mods. You can't win, you can only get removed or banned.
If you want to run a community where it's more offensive to say someone is ignorant than it is to lie about mass murdered civilians I'm not under the delusion that I can make you do anything else. Just don't expect me to not say it's a shitty policy or to ignore what it allows and what it doesn't allow.
Warned, 3 day ban.
So the rule actually isn't "don't make personal attacks", it's "don't tell the mods that their policies are bad." Maybe you should add that to the sidebar.
Repeated sealioning. 7 day ban.