I said something along the lines of:
“Wow, I haven’t had a reason to smile ear to ear in a while.”
Along with
“Nah, the more dead corpos dragons, the better.”
In response to some liberal going off about how violence is never the solution, not mentioning how this murdered dipshit has personally overseen a system that perpetuates harm, suffering and death (violence) in the name of profit.
…
Good ole’ civility clause.
Whats the paradox of tolerance?
.world mods have never heard of it I guess.
TOS you say?
I’m honestly shocked my own comment didn’t get deleted. When I saw how many were being nuked, I had to chime in. I guess they missed it in the chaos.
I looked at the logs myself, and it absolutely was power tripping. Jury nullification discussion isn’t even illegal for fucks sake.
Bans on any Lemmy instance are stupid because nobody gives a fuck about this place. This is just 4Chan for milquetoast nerds
So glad i went to Divide by Zero
I left after World said they would federate with threads.
The CEO got the treatment he gave his customers.
The whole “X instance are censoring users” was always projection lol.
Don’t get me wrong, I feel as though these CEOs shouldn’t be surprised at all. But those are toxic responses. With that said, I’m still laughing at the memes. Keep’em coming.
I’m just here to point out that everyone’s going to use the downvote button as a “disagree” button and the upvote as “agree,” and there’s nothing anyone can do to stop us. You can’t hold back the tide.
Yes.
As an anarchist, I am keenly aware that rules are merely suggestions, and are utterly meaningless when no system exists to actually enforce them.
The whole thing is all just made up. There are no “rules” written down like there are for software systems. There are just shared habits and models of the world, and traditions for how to react. In general, people agree and keep it all consistent enough from day to day that the rules in their heads translate into behavior and dependable systems in the real world. But it’s all just made up. It’s just people deciding what to do, every minute, in every society, based on what they decide in their brain, no matter how strict the “rules” that supposedly exist are.
Like how we could ‘make up’ having a healthcare system that provides universal affordable care to all citizens, but instead … we …
(not actually all of us, actually the extremely wealthy and influential people who control government policy and all the media that tells us what to think about government policy)
… ‘we’ make up a horrible, unjust system that perpetuates suffering, violence and death, so that a tiny minority of people can profit!
What I’m saying is that there is no mechanical system that puts those particular people in charge.
We had the gilded age, we had the labor battles that laid the foundation for the working economy of the 20th century, we had the New Deal and prosperity for a lot of people, then we let it get away from us and the crooks took charge again. But it all can change. We can make it different. People have fought their way back to good government from places a million times worse than modern-day America.
I’m not sure what you mean by mechanical.
Obviously there is not a physical machine like a 3d printer that produces a sociopoliticaleconomic system.
But there are absolutely empirically verified theories within sociology, political science, and economics which describe why historical events happened with a pretty good degree of accuracy, and a lot of them do function pretty mechanistically to predict likely future outcomes, though with a wider margin of possibility than physics predicting a physical machine.
I’m saying that nothing enforces these particular people being in charge, other than everyone agreeing that these are the people in charge, and that can change.
It has, in huge ways, for better and worse depending, all throughout history.
nothing enforces these particular people being in charge,
Is this a joke?
You’re saying there’s no military, no police, no jobs that take all our time just to stay alive, no media that reinforces the desired narrative, no corruption, no broken electoral system, no economic stratification, no relgion and bigotry used to convince people to support their own materially worsening lives, no intentionally broken education system… none of that enforces who is in charge?
I could go on for actual hours about ludicrous this statement is, you have to almost entirely ignorant of history, poli sci, sociology, econ, a whole number of other fields, to be able to say something like this.
I saw that old tired “It’s not a disagree button! Only downvote comments that don’t add to the discussion!” thing time and time again on reddit, but I’ve never seen it here. I hoped that it was accepted and understood that they are indeed agree/disagree buttons.
People might think that they shouldn’t be that, but it’s immaterial. That’s how people are going to use them, so other people might as well get used to it.
Honestly, I’ve never seen it be a problem for them to be like that. Whatever people were afraid of, it clearly wasn’t a big deal. They work fine.
dios mío, A LIBERAL!
I think they should make a post addressing this but it is pretty funny to see people’s reactions
PTB, comments celebrating a person who’s horrible are not encouraging violence. This is clearly an attempt from the mods to push their agenda. Their replies here in this thread support this theory.
for me i consider human life sacred and despite the mistakes of this person only God may judge us.
I think this comment snippet speaks for itself honestly.
looks like most of the mod actions you are looking at were done by little_cow (do not tag or harass) who has actually been fairly decent and understanding in my interactions with them.
very likely these actions are being done by threat of the .world admins, who cannot be replaced or swayed as it’s their property (servers) that host the content. not getting in on either side of this because honestly idgaf but if any of this upsets you:
vote with your activity and registration and stop using lemmy.world. i was here before they essentially made lemmy a centralized platform and trust me it was way cooler back then, it could be that way again.
vote with your activity and registration and stop using lemmy.world
Additionally, people who moderate communities there might consider to either create or join alternatives elsewhere. Because, seriously, this shit is .ml/Reddit tier.
I can’t really discuss the actual topic here intelligibly bc I always block !politics@lemmy.world as one of if not the very first action for every new account I make anywhere across the Fediverse (I simply prefer the alternatives like !climate@slrpnk.net and !globalnews@lemmy.zip), nor have I looked into the modlog as you have. But may I make a tangential observation, if it’s not too annoying for it to be off-topic like this?
Have you seen the actual - albeit dog whistled - calls for violence, naming actual names and showing actual faces? I just saw one in Shitpost (https://lemmy.world/post/22802422), another in Memes, and there are additional cross-posts as well. Similar content or others that likewise extoll the virtues of violence include Comic Strips (https://mander.xyz/post/21552536) showing up in communities all across Lemmy, like here’s one that’s not the post itself but rather the comment section in Not The Onion (https://midwest.social/post/20083880).
I thought that such calls for violence - as Admiral Patrick calls it somewhere here in the comments of this post, a “lynch mob mentality” - would die down quickly after the election, but it seems quite the opposite instead. So it’s a very emotionally charged issue right now. And I even get it, though aside from rightness or wrongness, people each have their preferences as to what they can stomach, and e.g. someone with lived experience through such (like a school shooting event) may not be able to handle all of this.
Anyway I’m glad that you are sharing alternatives, bc no matter what, we need to not be dependent upon a single instance. But I do see where - again, setting aside right vs. wrong - there’s a real split across Lemmy right now about how such matters “should” be handled. At which point I agree with you in spirit that there NEEDS to be transparency in the moderation practices (even if, as others have suggested elsewhere here, this particular situation seems to be the result of a single moderator who may have acted overzealously to protect people from the rhetoric). Perhaps you can write a post to the mods or even admins of that instance asking for such, though it would probably be better to wait a week for this all to die down - perhaps the mod in question will apologize, or even be removed, though what you may want instead (but don’t let me put words into your mouth) is a clarification to be made to the wording of the community or instance rules. We really can affect the changes that we’d like to see, much of the time. And if/when not, then at least you know that you did your absolute best to try:-).
Edit: even a few hours later, the process has already begun, see e.g. the apology from the mod at https://lemmy.world/comment/13815531.
links
https://lemmy.world/post/22802422 has been deleted.
https://mander.xyz/post/21552536 is hard to interpret as praising violence IMO - no explanation is given why the pigeon (a typically passive animal) is burning the house.
https://midwest.social/post/20083880) is mostly people cheering on the current events. It does praise violence, but at the same time it acknowledges that CEO as a source of suffering for people.
I do think that mob mentality plays a role, but I don’t think that it’s the main factor here. People (not just you all in USA, but everywhere) are getting pissed; the ones in power always babbling that things will get better, and yet we don’t see it.
Perhaps you can write a post to the mods or even admins of that instance asking for such, though it would probably be better to wait a week for this all to die down - perhaps the mod in question will apologize, or even be removed, though what you may want instead (but don’t let me put words into your mouth) is a clarification to be made to the wording of the community or instance rules. We really can affect the changes that we’d like to see, much of the time. And if/when not, then at least you know that you did your absolute best to try:-).
I think that the issue is mostly on an admin level, not on a mod level. And based on previous interactions with one of those admins… seriously, I’ll pass - at least that one was a bit too eager to distort things to their convenience.
Plus you know, I’m awful at writing this sort of thing down - I write a full wall of text for what would need two lines.
They have their moderation style, you would do differently, and regardless of right or wrong the goal is to match moderation activities to the community desires. But that probably will require additional volunteers to really get off the ground, so that’s perhaps something that you could do? Ofc I cannot speak to your condition wrt your life status right now, I just hoped to point to whatever I could to help you realize that you are not powerless nor alone in wanting a sense of justice to be enacted - the trick being whose justice, especially when dealing with global cross-cultural values.
Wherever we go forward from here, it will require effort. And making that list is a good start:-).
I think that it’s less about different styles (like being laxer/stricter, sticking more/less to the letter of the rules, etc.) and more about bringing bad habits from Reddit. In Reddit neither your typical non-mod user nor your typical mod gives a damn about the rules - one expects to be able to go rogue unpunished and then punished for something random, while another wants a bullshit reason to get that feeling of power over the others. (Note that I’m talking on typical grounds. There were plenty decent = exceptional mods there, too.)
And, when I say that one of the admins was too eager to distort things to their convenience, I wasn’t even referring to my interactions with them as an admin, but just as another user. From Canvas 2025 times [I can give you further context if you want.]
I do know that it’ll require effort and a collective one, and I think that we [users in general] should work in that direction. I just think that I’m the wrong person for this specific job, I’m probably better at gathering info - like the lists.
I am trying to break things down into their component parts.
First, your lists are absolutely helpful, for many reasons even those unrelated to this incident, but for helping the Fediverse become less decentralized overall - so thank you for them:-).
Second, I have mostly avoided thinking about the actual admins yet bc I haven’t heard anything from them directly yet - though indirectly from the mod in question I did hear that the admins plan to modify the ToS to increase its transparency in relation to such things. It does valid to me that they need to worry about the police 🚨 knocking on their door 🚓, hence panicked a bit when they all that stuff. It’s also hard to figure some of that stuff out bc even if Lemmy.World is in - I don’t even know where, Germany? UK? France? somewhere in the EU I would suppose - if the USA feds were to ask them to remove it or else face some troubles, what kind of pressure would that place upon them?
Third, the actions of the actual mod in question have given me strong hope for the livelihood of the Fediverse in general - she apologized immediately, rescinded the bans, offered an explanation, and also her reasoning besides, and explained what she should have done and promised will do in the future instead.
I offered more depth on these matters in a recent reply to this comment from Blaze.
Except .ml would not ban you for these specific comments
But they would ban you for even remotely crtiical of NK, China, Russia, or Cuba. They’re terrible for different reasons.
No, it wouldn’t ban you for these specific comments, but it would ban you in the same exact scummy way: listing one rule, enforcing another, then lying that you violated the listed rule.
[Edit: I said “emphasis mine” and then deleted the quote. I’m a moron.]
I don’t even disagree with any of the mod actions here, and I fully agree with this.
I abandoned lemmy.world communities except for a handful of things, mostly the PugJesus communities and news@lemmy.world which for some reason is fine. Everything else, I found replacements for that seem like they’re way superior.
So much better.
big facts, especially for the worldnews community. for some reason my instance doesn’t see this quokk instance but i have to imagine that any mod team is better than the ineffectual nepotism heap of wilty lettuce that is !world@lemmy.world’s
Looks like it’s !world@quokk.au and not worldnews
Hey not sure why it’s not visible on your end? I’ve seen other Lemmy.cafe users post there before.
Maybe give it a try tomorrow? Could be a Lemmy syncing thing.
@MBM@lemmings.world got me sorted. https://lemmings.world/comment/12313516 i just didn’t troubleshoot very hard lol
!world@lemmy.world and !politics@lemmy.world are so strange. It’s just baffling. I haven’t even checked to see what’s currently going on, if MBFC bot is still around or if they’ve found a new troll to take under the protection of the mod team and ban people for arguing with. I don’t know, and I don’t want to know.
I’m not at all surprised by the negative talk, but removing the thread is a terrible look.
The news is still relevant, current, developing, and of interest to many people, including me.
Let people be jerks. If I recall, the first comment to be removed was about guillotines. Bad taste, yes, but c’mon.
Nobody removed the thread. There was one repost removal, but other than that, all I see in the modlog is comment removals and bans. The relevant, current, developing, and of interest story is not exactly a secret as of right now.
A thread I was following in News@lemmy.world is deleted. I had it saved and was referring back to it and other searches in hopes of updates as it’s very relevant to me personally.
Not a huge deal of course, but I know at least one conversation was nuked, even if this post doesn’t refer to that incident.
It looks like there were a handful of reposts that got removed. I don’t know why I had only seen the one.
I get what you’re saying now. It sucks to have an active thread of conversation suddenly get nuked. On the other hand, it’s not a good situation to have 5 different duplicate posts of the exact same story cluttering up the feed for no reason.
It’s not related to the calls for violence. It’s just from the reposts. I think your irritation should maybe be directed at the people who don’t check if a post is a duplicate before posting it. I’m not sure what else the mods could do in that situation that’s any better than what they did, since Lemmy doesn’t have functionality for redirecting comment threads from multiple duplicate posts together into one, or anything like that.
I decided to make an account on sjw because of this. Now I won’t get made fun of for having a .world account 😁
Welcome, we have (mostly) free speech over here.
here look I'll test it
🖕
WHOAA COOL IT BUDDY!!
I’m not your buddy, pal.
🥳here as well
come on over and join us sh.itheads.
lmao just realized the initialism for shit just works is also for ‘social justice warrior’
A 24 hour temp ban for celebrating violence is actually pretty reserved. Certainly not power tripping.
🤡
Counterargument: no.
E: To elaborate, the terms of service say:
“**We do not tolerate threats of and calls for violence in any form against any living creature.**”
Merely expressing glee is not calling for violence or threatening a living creature. Banning someone for a rule they didn’t break, for any duration, is overreach.
CEO isn’t even living anymore so they’re not breaking the rule just based off that.
Except that it very much is. How can you not see that?
These gleeful comments are very much what? Celebrating violence, as you originally said? If so, sure. However, celebrating violence is not against the rules. Go to any Ukrainian-on-Russian drone strike video and you’ll find plenty of people celebrating death. What is against the rules is making threats or calling people to violent action against another. These are very much not the same thing. In the insurace CEO thread, the overwhelming majority of removed comments were not making threats or trying to incite more violence.
Celebrating violence is a method used to call for more violence. And the reason the war isn’t heavily moderated is because it’s a war. It’s already at the worst state, and further violence is a foregone conclusion. That’s a massive difference to celebrating a murder. Being popular doesn’t mean it’s okay suddenly.
I expected empire apologia in your comment history, and you delivered. Classic.
Oh god you made me snort.
Class war is a war too, and it’s not one that we the people started. Condemning the CEO’s death is saying that he should’ve been allowed to keep killing millions of more people through coverage denial, a form of social murder that ends their lives prematurely the exact same as gunning them down. Further violence is just as much a forgone conclusion, it’s just a question of whether it will be resisted or left unchecked.
Class war being an actual hot war is both highly debatable and highly inflammatory. It’s a fringe ideology of an already minority ideology. Expecting that to be a moderating standard on one of the largest Lemmy Instances is ridiculous at best.
So gonna be a bootlicker… Weird time to expose it lol
It’s not really about ideology, it’s reality. People are being killed every day by people like Brian Thompson. If you actually cared, it’s pretty easy to find countless stories of people losing loved ones because their insurance company sacrificed their lives for profit. Nobody really pays attention to those stories though, because the violence is so common, frequent, and normalized that we’ve become desensitized to it. In contrast, when violence happens in the reverse direction, in a highly contained retaliatory strike against one of the people most responsible, it’s shocking precisely because it’s so rare, because our side is so much more peaceful and restrained than theirs.
But whether for good or ill, as long as the system keeps backing people against the wall, more of this will happen. It’s inevitable, you can’t expect people to just accept it as conditions get harsher and more and more intolerable. If you commit social murder, you’re putting your own life on the line.
I don’t really see what’s debatable or ideological about that. When people get fucked over, they will fight back.
There’s still a clear distinction between celebrating violence and calling for further violence.
You’re making a leap between the two.
They are explicitly and literally not the same thing, even if celebrating can be, and often is, used as part of a call for more.
Every cat is an animal, but not every animal is a cat.
The problem is you guys want to lawyer this like it’s legislation. You’re not wrong about the dictionary definitions. You are however absolutely wrong about how the English language is used and how violence is propagated.
This how the general population feels… Cope dear
The person is no longer liing so you cannot call for violance aganst a living person for expressing glee to them
I also feel like wanting death to IDK the bacteria that causes the plague, or taberculousis, should not be a banable office but that is a bannable creature
also does wanting a hamburger count as calling for violace aganst a cow… a living creature?
Not only does what the banns are for not break the rule, but the rule is so broad as to be useless and cripple most conversations
And now you’re being absurd.
ok so lets look at his the tos is “We do not tolerate threats of and calls for violence in any form against any living creature.” is that correct. so if something is already dead, like a porkchop, we can both agree that I can threaten a porkchop because it is already dead and so not living. This would be the same as a corpse, a corpse is no longer a living thing, so cheering a death AFTER someone died it is not advocating violance to a living creature its a dead creature. There is nothing incorrect or absurd in that statement
now lets look at it agian “We do not tolerate threats of and calls for violence in any form against any living creature.” Well, Mosquitos, Bacteria, plants, funguses, are all “living creatures” so I ask in ernistness does using anti-biotics not technicaly qualify as violance on a living creature? what about the Eradication of the guinnie worm? wanting to harvist a field? all of them are violance on living creatures, is this an unorthodox take yes, but it is not abserd, it is simular to the Jade view, and it is consistent with the rules you have set forth.
You cannot argue that an interpretation you do not like is abserd, you can say that is not the interpritation that the mod team follows, thats fine, I already have issues with your moderation policies but that is fair, but to say that following your rules to the letter but not nessicarily the spirit is abserd, that is just bad rule writing.
Denying millions of legitimate claims that directly leads to many people being physically harmed or dying is violence on a large scale. So is lobying the government to keep healthcare in shambles for hundreds of millions of people.
It’s a less visible, less gorey form of violence than a gun, but violence that begets mass suffering and death nonetheless.
If you define that as violence then everything is violence and nothing is legitimate. Overly broad definitions meant to paralyze society are a form of violence because people will die if we take no action, but we can’t take action because Vent defined that as violence.
Overly broad definitions meant to paralyze society are a form of violence because people will die if we take no action
100% agree, this is a propaganda tactic used constantly by politicians and the rich and powerful. For example, if one were to broaden the definition of “illegal immigrant” to include more people, then use that definition to incite racism and mass deportation, I would consider that rhetoric a form of violence.
Would a military commander at war be considered non-violent because they only order subordinates to shoot but don’t do the shooting themselves? Is the president ordering a nuke non-violent because they don’t drop the bomb themselves?
Now, what if someone were to order the denial of life-saving medical care to thousands of civilians that have already paid for it?
We can’t take action because Vent defined that as violence.
When did I say we can’t take action against violence, or that violent actions don’t sometimes call for violent responses?
That’s the joke. If you define violence as broadly as you have then you end up in an ethical trap that has only one exit; violence is moral and I should use it to protect my values before it is used on me.
I simply didn’t highlight the exit in my previous comment. But I can see from yours that you’ve already decided this and decided this excuses people from following any rules about not propagating violence.
na your just committing the absurdist logical fallacy. violence absolutely can be ethical and we’re rapid approaching that state in the US.
There’s large differences between violence being immoral, having qualified exceptions, and being moral. Most people are in the middle. Every really shitty period of time, like when commoners were being executed en masse in the French Revolution, lives in the violence is moral category. I don’t know about you but I’d like to avoid living in a time where my neighbor can report me to the secret police and I get sent to the gulag, or where educated people are rounded up and shot because they “can’t be trusted”.
That’s where celebrating mob violence leads, on the left and right.
uh huh. no one is talking about murdering civvies. we’re discussing good trimming the ol’ bourgeois stock as its become sick and a danger to us. its good that you’re trying to contextualize situations. now all you need to do is contextualize the what people are actually saying vs. what you think they’re saying.
Now well, if you are in the bourgeois class. might want to start getting your house in order. start punishing your bad actors appropriately etc.
I’m hearing that you believe violence is never moral, correct? Is Ukraine amoral to use violence to stop Russia’s invasion?
I never said that so I don’t know why you would believe that.
All I’m getting from this is that you’re fine with people needlessly dying as long as the death wasn’t a direct result of violence.
Of course not. But more death isn’t the answer. Because we’ve seen that route and it doesn’t end the cycle. Check out France and Russia. They didn’t solve anything with their incredibly violent reprisals against their ruling classes. The only way to end this cycle is to end the existence of a wealthy elite. Which you can do by taking their money away.
What about WWII? The US Revolution? The US civil war? The Haitian Revolution? Is France really worse off now? Ukraine?
Violence / death is very rarely the answer to anything, but it’s a cold hard fact that sometimes it is, especially when you start bringing war and revolutions into it, lmao.
The only way to end this cycle is to end the existence of a wealthy elite. Which you can do by taking their money away.
“Hand over your money, please!”
To be clear, I’m not advocating for killing anyone in the streets, and vigilante justice like this is not something I’d like to see, but the blanket response of “violence bad” is plain wrong.
The US Revolution wasn’t anything like the French and Russian ones. Haiti was but it wasn’t Haitians that screwed them over afterwards, it was the US. So maybe they could have been the one time where an orgy of violence worked?
To be clear, I’m not advocating for killing anyone in the streets, and vigilante justice like this is not something I’d like to see, but the blanket response of “violence bad” is plain wrong.
Except you’re here defending exactly that.
Based on your arguments here you’re basically saying that celebrating (or maybe even even simply not condemning?) this act of violence means that you must tacitly endorse this type of violence, correct? That’s a very long bow to draw.
I think most people, myself included, would much prefer a non-violent way to prevent capitalists from profiting directly from the physical and financial misery of sick and dying people. Like maybe some stronger laws, better regulation and enforcement, and active prosecution of non-compliant companies and their bosses, for a start, right? But in the seeming absence of that possibility, why not let folks have their schadenfreude moment in peace?
24 hours for chearing someone who is responsable for the death of thousands, is not refusing someone life saving medical care not violence? Is this not the paradox of tolarance you folks always harp on about?
I’m sorry but, “come back tomorrow” really doesn’t have the dictatorial energy people seem to want it to have.
Look it is not the time, sure the time is reasonable, the issue is what you have chosen to do this over, your reasoning for it, not only has it not technicaly violated the letter of the TOS snippits that have been posted, it is also the moral call, which side are you on, when the CEO who made a fortune by letting others die … is killed, do you let the people discuss it and cheer the death of someone who caused so much suffering, or do you assist the Capitalist class, and supress that sentiment, YOU have to make the choice.
the issue we have is not its a day, its that you chose to help the capitalists
Do you want a TOS the size of a novel? Because idiotic arguments like this is how you get that. They will pay for a few hours of a lawyer’s time to create an honest to god TOS if you force them. The only reason you don’t want to see this as a violation is because you agree with the actions.
I mean, are you saying that me following the rule and not the arbitrary spirit of your TOS is a stupid argument, no its not stupid, yes its in grey or bad faith, but its not stupid. Rules should be able to cover atleast grey faith arguments, or atleast attempt to. If your rules can only work if read in good faith, and we can all understand the sperit it is written in they are worthless
