112
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] cm0002@lemmy.world 88 points 1 month ago

Eh, kinda half and half. Kids these days seem to forget rule #1 of the internet: if you're under 18 never admit it anywhere, anytime, for any reason.

Hell, don't even admit you made your account when you were underage, but aren't now. I've seen regular forums and MMORPGs ban people who admitted they were underage at the time they made the account, but not anymore

[-] AttacktoWin@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I feel like the rules of the internet should be taught again, or at least particularly stuff like "don't feed the trolls". All of these engagement based algorithms are too focused on pushing bait content.

[-] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 54 points 1 month ago

PTB. This is unreasonable. Also trying to prevent teenagers from accessing the internet is just going to lead to all teenagers just lying about their age. It's not going to stop it. It's just going to mean they can't discuss their actual opinions and issues honestly. It would also reinforce the need to lie to be part of culture, which is just not healthy.

Teenagers lying about their age on the internet is as old as teenagers on the internet.

Keeping the age barriers in place is good anyway. It communicates to younger people clearly that the content is not considered suitable for them. It gives them a moment to think and reconsider.

Participating in online culture might be generally not healthy for adults as well.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] fxomt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 41 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Damn, i liked sag :(

I think i'm going with a soft PTB from my pov. Tbf dbzer0 is pretty lax on rules, especially towards people outside the instance. I don't think it's within my place or anyone else's to ban someone from such a huge part of the fediverse.

But this highlights the need to decentralize from .world, the fact that a single instance ban can take away such a huge part of the fediverse from a user feels ridiculous.

I get why they did it, but it feels unfair.

[-] crazyminner@lemmy.ml 22 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I willingly blocked .world that place is a toxic cesspool. It also felt too much like reddit.

[-] drtaco@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 1 month ago

Yeah, this sort of stuff strikes me as bad for the user affected and for .world, but good for lemmy overall. An active, competent user is being forced to post to non-LW communities exclusively.

[-] fxomt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 1 month ago

Damn RIP then if I got banned from .world after this post I am leaving Lemmy.

I hope he doesn't.

[-] drtaco@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Agreed. But even if he does, this sort of stuff contributes to a reputation and could lead future users to choose to post to communities on better instances. That's the part I think would be good for lemmy overall.

[-] Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world 40 points 1 month ago

Hey, I’m the one that decided to ban this user. I understand the frustration, but it is very much in the TOS of lemmy.world and has been for a long time.

We are having an internal discussion to see if there’s room to lower the age to 16 and if we can make exceptions for federated users.

I hope you see that this really isn’t meant as a powertrip, and we are just trying to protect the Lemmy.world site.

Sorry if I do not respond to comments quickly, it’s late in my timezone.

[-] Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com 30 points 1 month ago

Hello,

Thank you for chiming in. Exceptions for federated users would be nice, especially for someone turning 18 in a few months.

[-] Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world 21 points 1 month ago

Yea, I agree, and I would personally be for that. But I am not well versed in the law, and don’t have any stake in the legal side of it all except for me liking lemmy.world, so it’s not my decision.

I really hope people understand where we as admins are coming from, we really take no enjoyment out of banning anyone (except for spammers).

[-] Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 month ago

Let's hope that you can work something out!

[-] Blazingtransfem98@discuss.online 12 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I really hope people understand where we as admins are coming from, we really take no enjoyment out of banning anyone (except for spammers).

That's one of the most transparent lies I've heard. Power corrupts, and I've seen plenty of lemmy.world admins who certainly do enjoy it, and who do it to people to prove a point or as a knee jerk reaction to disagreement. You can call it whatever you want to call, you can deny this fact but it does happen and I've seen it myself, and I'd prefer you don't try to feed me lies I'm smart enough to see right through.

[-] Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

I understand that my comment was ambiguous, I tried to say that the current admins, in my experience, don't enjoy banning people.

[-] Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 1 month ago

I'm sorry but the "(happy birthday in advance)" doesn't really paint that ban in the best light

[-] Blazingtransfem98@discuss.online 8 points 1 month ago

Yeah that doesn't at all, it definitely does come across as enjoying it and makes his statements less believable.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Blazingtransfem98@discuss.online 8 points 1 month ago

I don't know if that's entirely true for all or even most of the current ones, it certainly isn't for past lemmy.world admins, who may or may not still be on the team.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] fxomt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 1 month ago

Disappointing, yet understandable :/ Thank you for replying, and addressing this.

[-] arudesalad@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

(Opinion bit)

There should definitely be an exception for federated users. @sag@lemm.ee did not sign up to lemmy.world and therefore did not agree to the ToS.

(I am not a lawyer, anyone else can correct the stuff I say below)

Since lw isn't storing sag's data (apart from public posts and comments) there shouldn't be any concerns with child data protection. lemm.ee would be serving them content that under 18s shouldn't view, not lw (unless they are hosting it, which I don't think you do?). I may be missing something (again, not a lawyer) but what is the point of this other than being (in my opinion, a bit too) careful with the law?

[-] sag@lemm.ee 8 points 1 month ago

Any update on this?

If LW is banning me for real then ban my all alt.

@sag@ani.social

@sag@lemy.lol

[-] jadedwench@lemmy.dbzer0.com 35 points 1 month ago

That is a kind of shitty response from World and seems a little condescending to me, but tone is difficult. You are welcome here and I would rather you stay and interact with the rest of us than leave the fediverse. Your voice matters and I didn't have the same outlets when I was your age.

[-] Draconic_NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com 35 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

PTB, this seems really like they're overstepping their bounds, @Demigodrick@lemmy.zip has clarified the matter.

Unfortunately this isn't the first time Lemmy.world has done something like this using "legal" as an excuse, and probably won't be the last time. They're too big so they'll never get defederated or penalized by any server wishing to stay even remotely relevant so nothing is likely to change.

[-] comfy@lemmy.ml 35 points 1 month ago

Aw, they actually did the ban. That's unfortunate.

On one hand, yes, legal liability and all that, but on the other hand half the site is copyright violations. The law only matters sometimes. I say this as someone who has hosted web communities myself, there's no reason to be banning for something like age on these instances, especially when we're talking 16 and not 12. It's unenforceable and trivial enough that there's no legal pressure to do so.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] flamingos@feddit.uk 26 points 1 month ago

I'm really not sure how the TOS apply given it opens with:

This Terms of Service applies to your access to and active use of https://lemmy.world/, it's API's and sub-domain services (ex alt GUIs)(we, us, our the website, Lemmy.World, or LW) as well as all other properties and services associated with Lemmy.World.

Sag wasn't accessing or making active use of lemmy.world itself. This would be like an email provider blocking a particular address from another service because the user of that address doesn't comply with a part of their TOS.

[-] redrumBot@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 month ago

Fully agree.

CLM/CLA.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] kane@femboys.biz 23 points 1 month ago

Yeah, it seems a little odd to do a full ban for anyone under 18. Do they feel that all communities on there are not appropriate for minors?

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 1 month ago

@sag@lemm.ee FYI since I don't think you've seen the new comments on your initial post

[-] irelephant@calckey.world 18 points 1 month ago

@Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com Is it the responsibility of gmail to make sure that people on other mail services don't break their TOS?

Isn't that the whole point of email being federated?

[-] Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 1 month ago

It's always a bit surprising when people reply from Misskey or Mastodon, I feel like I have to answer while they just comment generally

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] sag@lemm.ee 16 points 1 month ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Stovetop@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago

I'm half and half. I get it, liability and all.

I do think it's healthy for young people to get more info outside of the bubble of their family and school and we got away with crazy shit on the internet back in the day.

But that was also when the internet was relatively new and a lot of sketchy shit was being done to kids online during that time. Governments today are cracking down on sites that allow kids to use them, and no one wants to be the site admin who convinced yet another European country to draft draconian "think of the children" anti-privacy laws.

The other part of it too is, c'mon, basically rule #1 of using the internet is never admit when you're underage. Like every other Millennial out there, I was born on Jan 1, 1960.

[-] recklessengagement@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago

Gonna go against the grain here and say YDI.

As others have mentioned, liability. The hosts of Lemmy instances are doing an incredible service enabling us to use this platform for free. And in providing that service, they are also assuming a significant amount of risk in a rather volatile legal environment. The law views a platform that allows ("targets") minors very differently from one that is intended only for adults.

Additionally, TOS. Its as simple as that. This is not power tripping, this is just enforcement. Even if there was nothing explicity wrong about the behavior, once age is directly mentioned, liability is opened, and their hands are tied.

As a side note, there is nothing wrong with adult-only community spaces. Sometimes I want to have a discussion without worrying about whether the person on the other end is a literal child - there are enough adults that act like children as it is...

[-] nomugisan@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 month ago

"The law discriminates against and limits the freedom of children, therefore they're totally justified!"

Yeah ok sure

[-] Blazingtransfem98@discuss.online 14 points 1 month ago

For real, this type of apologia is downright disgusting.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] flicker@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 month ago

I'm biased here. I'm still against .world and their tendency to use "legality" as a smokescreen. (Blaming it for banning Luigi content right after he axed that United guy has earned my ire forever.)

However... I'm almost 40, and it was always the rule to never mention your age until it didn't matter. So on the one hand, world loves to use legality to push it's agenda. On the other hand, this is an expected outcome.

[-] Draconic_NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 1 month ago

I agree with you that no one should really mention their age, though I don't agree with you that there's a point where it doesn't matter. You'll find plenty of groups willing to discriminate against older individuals, gaming groups, activist groups, STEM groups, it's weird but it's unfortunately a thing.

Lemmy.world has a problem with over modderation when it is out of scope in situations like this, they also have a problem with undermoderation letting shit slide that shouldn't like Reddit did. Lemmy.world has a lot of very big problems right now and they shouldn't be cut slack of any of them, even if it is obvious how it happened.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2025
112 points (100.0% liked)

Ye Power Trippin' Bastards

1142 readers
1 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.


Posting Guidelines

All posts should follow this basic structure:

  1. Which mods/admins were being Power Tripping Bastards?
  2. What sanction did they impose (e.g. community ban, instance ban, removed comment)?
  3. Provide a screenshot of the relevant modlog entry (don’t de-obfuscate mod names).
  4. Provide a screenshot and explanation of the cause of the sanction (e.g. the post/comment that was removed, or got you banned).
  5. Explain why you think its unfair and how you would like the situation to be remedied.

Rules


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.

YTPB matrix channel: For real-time discussions about bastards or to appeal mod actions in YPTB itself.


Some acronyms you might see.


Relevant comms

founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS