We've seen an uptick in people posting dunks in here that belong in dunk_tank, as well as low-hanging fruit that gets removed from or isn't allowed in dunk_tank anymore. For context, rule 8 of dunk_tank:

Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this.

There's a reason that dunks are cordoned off to their own comm, some users rightfully don't want to see reactionary nonsense all the time, even if we're making fun of the person who said it. /c/cth is a general-purpose comm but it's NOT for posting some random nobody asshole twitter user's bad takes, the absolute best course of action to take when you see that stuff out in the wild is to either directly shit on them yourself, or ignore them and don't give them more attention.

From this point on I'm going to be more stringent about moderating this. I get it, it's fun to dunk on the libs and the blue checks and the frothingfash and that's why we have a whole dedicated comm for that. Any post that's obviously meant to be "hey look at this piece of shit, let's laugh at how bad their opinions are, upbears to the left and emojis in chat" belongs in the_dunk_tank. And any super low-hanging fruit doesn't belong on this site, period (see TDT rule 8 above). We have better things to do with our time than give unearned attention, time and energy to low-follower-count nobodies yelling into the void.

Thanks for your discretion comrades, stay sicko sicko-jammin

edit: as others have pointed out, /c/shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml is a good place for any and all dunking content not allowed here. Post that ragebait to our comrades at the 'grad, they'll make good use of it. Also, per rule 9 of TFT dunking on fediverse users is still explicitly allowed so it's still open season on those in our own backyard.

  • buckykat [none/use name]
    ·
    7 months ago

    Surely everyone will stop posting the posts they like to post because the two comms those posts best fit in ban those posts

    • FunkyStuff [he/him]
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yeah? We had people posting casual transphobia and casual racism here in the early days, heavy moderation put an end to that. Obviously bad posts and bigotry aren't comparable but you get the idea, moderation is like cyberbullying but with institutional power; and if we've learned anything from the posting wars it's that bullying works.

      • buckykat [none/use name]
        ·
        7 months ago

        That's not really comparable. Racism and transphobia are actually bad and ideologically opposed to the ideals of the site, making fun of bad opinions but with numbers that are too small under them is not. Getting rid of people who post racism and transphobia is a good thing to do, but are you actually suggesting banning low-hanging-fruit-dunkers?

        • FunkyStuff [he/him]
          ·
          7 months ago

          As I said, it's not about the morals of the behavior, just the behavior itself and the fact that moderation will inevitably tone it down. And I don't think bans make sense for rule 8, but do you think people who post random twitter screenshots to the dunk tank are gonna keep going after their 36th consecutive post gets removed?

              • buckykat [none/use name]
                ·
                7 months ago

                You seriously want to ban people for posting dunks you don't like? This whole campaign against "low hanging fruit" is silly.

                • EmmaGoldman [she/her, comrade/them]M
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  I don't want to have to ban anyone for anything, no mod here does. If someone is just going to keep spamming the whole site with content that keeps getting removed, then yeah. They'll likely catch a ban for spam.

                  • buckykat [none/use name]
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    dunks on posts that don't have the right (arbitrarily and secretly defined) numbers under them are not garbage

                      • buckykat [none/use name]
                        ·
                        7 months ago

                        So the dunk tank should be empty and all posts that once went there should go in !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml instead? Because you, the mods, have consistently refused to actually define what "low-hanging fruit" even means. When I raised this point a month ago in the rule 8 announcement thread on TDT, mod replaceable told me he would do "a vibes based analysis on every post" which is clearly a joke, but also clearly not actually an answer.

                            • EmmaGoldman [she/her, comrade/them]M
                              ·
                              7 months ago

                              As other people have mentioned both here and when rule 8 was announced, different platforms have different levels of engagement so what's considered "notable" is going to have a differing level from site to site.

                              I don't know that we've drawn out like more specific thresholds for different sites but I know we're still working on getting the feel for it.

                              Famous, household names like major celebrities or sports players are obviously going to be allowed, as are political figures like senators, congresspeople, heads of state. There's a sort of moderate level of notability we're still figuring out, but a good sort of guesstimate area is whether a person has passed milestones like having a wikipedia page, passing 100k subscribers on YouTube or being talked about in newspapers of record, being a leader in an organization of note. Things like that are a good place to start.

                              If it's a name you don't need to explain or you can reasonably explain why an individual you're posting is a notable person, that's a good start.

                              • buckykat [none/use name]
                                ·
                                7 months ago

                                So it actually has nothing to do with number of upvotes/likes/views, which is the ill defined, vibes based metric in the text of the rule, but is actually about notability of the poster, a completely different ill defined, vibes based metric? That's even more restrictive than the rule as written, which would seem to allow, for example, a post from some random jackass so long as it got an arbitrarily high number under it.

                                • EmmaGoldman [she/her, comrade/them]M
                                  ·
                                  7 months ago

                                  A level of fame is easier to quantify. Upvote counts and Facebook likes can climb to absurd levels from bot activity, like those 350,000 like "AI happy birthday injured babies" or posts someone shared the other day.

                                  It's going to be a little harder to quantify what level might make that post sufficiently worthy of note.

                        • BountifulEggnog [she/her]
                          ·
                          7 months ago

                          A post is low effort/low hanging fruit when few people saw the original, obviously.

                          • QuietCupcake [any, they/them]
                            ·
                            7 months ago

                            But what's "few"? Where should we draw the line? Yeah, mods can pick some arbitrary number (as is often the case for these kinds of things, it's the problem of the lump!) but this is also more complicated because there are different standards for different platforms. Like, what number of views on a youtube video is equivalent to what number of upvotes on reddit is equivalent to what number of followers on xitter, etc.? And what about blogs vs news sites? It really does just end up being so blatantly vibes-based.

                      • Ram_The_Manparts [he/him]
                        ·
                        7 months ago

                        It's interesting how your account has made a grand total of 11 posts and comments in a year, and now you're here doing whatever the fuck this is

                        Seems very organic

                        • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
                          ·
                          7 months ago

                          So now you're implying there's some kind of conspiracy against you? A cabal of people trying to "control the narrative?" The fact that a lurker is disgusted enough by your behaviour to comment on it should be a wake up call, but apparently you'd rather just double down.

                          • Ram_The_Manparts [he/him]
                            ·
                            7 months ago

                            So now you're implying there's some kind of conspiracy against you? A cabal of people trying to "control the narrative?"

                            jesse-wtf

                            • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
                              ·
                              7 months ago

                              Considering your comment earlier, the context of what you said looks fucking awful. Care to explain yourself?

                              • Ram_The_Manparts [he/him]
                                ·
                                7 months ago

                                The idea that I ever tried to make this about "a cabal of people controlling the narrative" rather than one specific individual is all in your head.

                                • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
                                  ·
                                  7 months ago

                                  Ok good, glad to hear you're not doing nazi dogwhistles then. Though I think if anyone has stuff "all in their head" its you imaging sockpuppet conspiracies against you. Even if it were true, why bother? They had a point about getting too attached to internet treats, once you start accussing anyone who disagrees with you of being a sockpuppet, it's probably time to log off and touch grass. This isn't a healthy thing for a person to be worrying about.

                                    • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
                                      ·
                                      7 months ago

                                      Agreed about touching grass, but what you were saying was really weird, I should've been clearer with what I was saying, I was too accusatory there, I wanted you to clarify what you were saying. But I was way too combative there.

                                      • Ram_The_Manparts [he/him]
                                        ·
                                        7 months ago

                                        Same here. Sincerely sorry about that.

                                        My grandfather was a literal fucking nazi and an all round piece of shit, and I tend to overreact when I feel like I'm being compared to him. (Not saying you were doing that of course)

                                        I'm also not very good with words, especially when I get all fired up and start rambling lol. That's on me.

                                        • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
                                          ·
                                          7 months ago

                                          I totally get that, my family were pieces of shit too, and I get a knee jerk reaction anytime anyone compares me to them too. Glad we could sort this out, one of my favourite things about hexbear/lemmygrad, we can stop talking past each other and actually calm down and fix things. :)

                        • sweet_pecan [love/loves, they/them]M
                          ·
                          7 months ago

                          lmao touch-grass simply dont be antisemitic, if you dont want to be told to not be antisemitic. no Idea why this is so hard for people.