The classic "why are you criticizing all
white men??? IM NOT RACIST WTF STFU" fragile-ass MFers
Guys, if you read a generalized critique of a dominant social group you belong to and you don't personally exhibit the criticized behaviors then it doesn't apply to you. Not that difficult. You are in the privileged group. You hold more power in society. If you get butthurt and need to correct the record over a meme that actually accurately represents a large number of first worlders (pro-capital bootsuckers) maybe analyze why it made you mad.
the fact that there exist people in first-world countries who aren't like the guy in the meme means you can't make jokes at the expense of people who are like the guy in the meme? nah dude, this admin removed the post in order to make their own political statement, it had nothing to do with the relevance of the post
No they most certainly are not - if I list the traits of a specific person, and you get angry that I'm generalising because you share 1 of the list of traits, you are wrong. I am not generalising, I am describing someone who isn't you.
The admin probably was a bit too uncharitable in interpreting the meme due to who was posting it
This is turning into a "2 minutes of hate" situation with you peeps and our instance, innit? :D
So I was correct in assuming that the post itself was fine, and the real reason behind it's removal was who posted it? If so I think I earned a collective laugh for me and my friends over here.
but it was ultimately removed for being unrelated to piracy.
This is my biggest gripe, I "borrowed" that meme from r/piracy it's clearly related to piracy: it's a play (an iperbole) on the stereotype of the "corporate bootlicker" I bet you encountered it tons of times in piracy communities, I certainly did.
but just a lemming being upset they got moderated
I'm laughing more than I'm crying, and so are all the other people in the thread.
Y'all need to chill with the hate though. It's what causing these situations as admins and mods immediately assume bad faith from hexbears and .ml
Your mods ban posts from lemmy.ml (may I remember you it's the 3rd largest and the oldest lemmy instance, founded by the lead developers and founders of lemmy software) on sight and we're the ones who need to chill? Bro I hate diagnosing people but your mod team is in a deep paranoid psichosis, if not outright bigotry against said instances. Do you want an echo chamber? Because that's how you get an echo chamber.
Idk bud, you're the one coming to our instance to complain about us making fun of your moderation policies. The very behavior of someone who is definitely not bothered.
To be honest I don't think anybody here (or you) is actually mad. You can do the whole 'Oh you should have cry-laugh emojis!' but you're just posting a hypothetical onto their posting style which doesn't exist. Some real scumbag reddit shit. Address what is actually being posted, don't pursue hypotheticals.
I don't think you get what is funny about it to us. If it was moderated for "Not relevant to the community" there would be zero gas. It was moderated for 'tankieism'. Since when was mild non-sectarian anti-capitalist sentiment 'tankie'? Your moderation team has clearly diluted the word to be completely meaningless and useless as a description of belief. Just say it's not relevant to the community! Don't betray your stupidity! It's not rocket science!
A call do disengage must be the only thing in the post. You don't get to respond to people and then call to disengage, this is completely disingenuous.
I think it's about time we defed from your garbage instance, and I'm glad to make sure you won't be showing you're entire ass around here again.
There you go again, proposing a hypothetical as if it is real. Again you don't understand what words actually mean. How is this 'rage-bait'? Who is profiting off of the advertising that makes something 'rage-bait'? It was a dumb moderation wording decision that we are collectively making fun of because we have a shared understanding of the meaning of a term. This isn't complicated.
Holy shit, dude you're just like every other tough-face poster, "I don't care, but I took time out of my day to call your posting habits unhealthy." Bro, of course you care, stop fronting! If you didn't care you wouldn't engage at all!
And you are following a post to an unrelated community to defend your moderation policies as if our opinions matter in the slightest to what is going on in your community. Why do you care what we think?
You really don't get how this works, do you? You don't get to insult people and then say 'Disengage'. That's not good forum behavior, that is disingenuous horseshit.
Stop using words you don't understand. It is not 'projecting' to point out you doing bad-faith posting.
The forum rules are that if you want me to disengage all you have to do is post under me 'Disengage'. That is it. If you include any other bullshit, especially insults, that is not considered acceptable, you are just abusing the rules of disengagement to get the last word it. This has been the rule on most forum posting for fucking forever.
'Rage-bait' is specifically a term used to describe posting that is meant to drive engagement for advertising models. I have a buddy who specifically makes rage bait around NFL content. It specifically describes that behavior. It is not 'getting mad or making fun of shit online', because that is literally just the Internet, especially forum posting since it's inception. Back in the day, we would catchall of that with 'trolling'.
Why should I care if you want to stop my 'toxic habits'? How does you wanting to stop those habits have any relevance on the conversation? Listen to yourself, you are talking as if you have any power to stop me even if you did care. Your care, in that regard, is completely irrelevant. A weird power-trip.
Being autistic is not a reason. It's deferring your reasoning onto your neuro-divergency. We aren't slandering you. Someone calling that person a tankie for some dumb shit happened! And even if we did slander you, what would you coming along to 'correct the record' do, especially if you come in with the assumption that we are all 'toxic posters who circle jerk at rage-bait'? How is coming along in bad-faith helpful to you having a reasonable discussion with us?
You literally came in calling it a '2-minute hate', am I really supposed to believe that you were just coming in to 'correct the record'?
I know it's unfortunate to your whole thing, but words have meaning and diluting them to whatever your rhetorical preference is at any given moment is literally what we are making fun of on this post.
I haven't seen a level of denial like this in a long time. Implying you don't care in general, then altering specifically saying that you don't care about changing my toxic posting, then getting confused when I say that is a weird power-trip if you did care about changing my toxic posting is an interesting strategy. We'll see if it works for you.
Wow, I didn't want to accuse you of using autism as a shield from criticism, but damn, stop using your autism as a shield from criticism. I think you should really dig into why you feel this need for control over a narrative that doesn't actually matter, especially if we are all just projecting bad-faith actors like you say. It would be nice if you could pick a lane and stick with it as to exactly what you think we are.
You had zero success with anyone else on the forum. It's genuinely sad that you think you did.
Edit: Damn, he got got by moderation. Just as the conversation was becoming productive!
I'm not a mod, but my understanding of the disengagement rule is that it's supposed to just be "disengage" not a whole message "getting the last word in". Not accusing you of doing that, but that's how I understand the rule.
Correct. Oftentimes we disagree on dumb shit, and the best course of action is to not let it devolve into childs' play.
You can't be a ePiCuReAn ReVoLuTiOnArY lIbErTaRiAn SoCiAlIsT and spam shit like this and then end the last line w/ "disengage" as if they can't now respond to the 3 paragraphs of text.
I completely agree with you, it is very bad faith. Since he's an admin I tried to be nice and assume the best, but returning to this thread I see it didn't really matter (when I made my comment it showed as his being the last in thread and not removed)
That's not what I said at all. Read again. It was still unrelated to the community.
I say it's related, you say it's unrelated, no point arguing.
Yes, I'm am very certain you're very not mad
Did you read the comments (both mine and of others?) we are just chatting, no salt down here. You think I'm salty, I think I'm not.
My post won't be reinstated, but we had a cheap laugh at the expense of your mod and had some sane discussions between ourselves, as far as I'm concerned this is a net win for me. You'll think we are all just a bunch of salty lunatics and that's your opinion.
There's no point arguing when both sides have unreconcilable viewpoints, our conversation ends here. Disengage.
Hey, not a moderator, but next time you want to disengage on hexbear, just post 'disengage' with nothing else. I don't think you did anything strictly incorrect here, but we need to keep the rules clear for people like db0.
Got it, wanted to clarify that we have different unreconcilable viewpoints and all that stuff, still learning this hexbear thing. I'll keep it in mind for the next time.
Thanks for the chilled response. I don't think it's an event that will result in much on its own, but it is a silly attitude.
"unrelated to piracy" when it's directly related to piracy, objecting to calling out the privilege of first-world people to be largely pro-corporate, and the fashionable name-calling of "tankie" does make for a triple whammy of lib-type silliness.
Oh look, the kid with 0 ability to moderate his bot problem deciding to fight the lefties instead of somebody to the right of "hunt the poors for sport"
This really tickled me because I remember db0 from Reddit being a moderator on anarchist subs for long enough that those credentials are old enough that they are well into their teen years themselves.
They absolutely must be in their 30s by now. If we say that they've been a moderator on Reddit for 15 years and that they became a mod at the ripe old age of 15, both of which are undeniably conservative estimates, then that makes them 30 years old.
I just had to chuckle when I saw you call them kid because I am pretty confident they're middle-aged by this point and I knew this offhand.
Why is it that every time I see good takes from your instance it's typically some random user in opposition to the rest, and every time I see the worst takes imaginable from your instance it's usually from you personally?
Removed by mod
You might want to chat with people before speaking for them, because they seem pretty adamanant that not all
menprivileged first worlders:The classic "why are you criticizing all white men??? IM NOT RACIST WTF STFU" fragile-ass MFers
Guys, if you read a generalized critique of a dominant social group you belong to and you don't personally exhibit the criticized behaviors then it doesn't apply to you. Not that difficult. You are in the privileged group. You hold more power in society. If you get butthurt and need to correct the record over a meme that actually accurately represents a large number of first worlders (pro-capital bootsuckers) maybe analyze why it made you mad.
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
the fact that there exist people in first-world countries who aren't like the guy in the meme means you can't make jokes at the expense of people who are like the guy in the meme? nah dude, this admin removed the post in order to make their own political statement, it had nothing to do with the relevance of the post
If you can't read then yeah sure I guess
No they most certainly are not - if I list the traits of a specific person, and you get angry that I'm generalising because you share 1 of the list of traits, you are wrong. I am not generalising, I am describing someone who isn't you.
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
I'm terribly sorry, idk how to word this in a way that doesn't somehow come across as rude, but I think you mean tenuous.
Removed by mod
I was thinking that might be the case! That's kinda why I pointed it out, it seemed more like a translation error than a homophone error.
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
So I was correct in assuming that the post itself was fine, and the real reason behind it's removal was who posted it? If so I think I earned a collective laugh for me and my friends over here.
This is my biggest gripe, I "borrowed" that meme from r/piracy it's clearly related to piracy: it's a play (an iperbole) on the stereotype of the "corporate bootlicker" I bet you encountered it tons of times in piracy communities, I certainly did.
I'm laughing more than I'm crying, and so are all the other people in the thread.
Your mods ban posts from lemmy.ml (may I remember you it's the 3rd largest and the oldest lemmy instance, founded by the lead developers and founders of lemmy software) on sight and we're the ones who need to chill? Bro I hate diagnosing people but your mod team is in a deep paranoid psichosis, if not outright bigotry against said instances. Do you want an echo chamber? Because that's how you get an echo chamber.
Removed by mod
Idk bud, you're the one coming to our instance to complain about us making fun of your moderation policies. The very behavior of someone who is definitely not bothered.
To be honest I don't think anybody here (or you) is actually mad. You can do the whole 'Oh you should have cry-laugh emojis!' but you're just posting a hypothetical onto their posting style which doesn't exist. Some real scumbag reddit shit. Address what is actually being posted, don't pursue hypotheticals.
I don't think you get what is funny about it to us. If it was moderated for "Not relevant to the community" there would be zero gas. It was moderated for 'tankieism'. Since when was mild non-sectarian anti-capitalist sentiment 'tankie'? Your moderation team has clearly diluted the word to be completely meaningless and useless as a description of belief. Just say it's not relevant to the community! Don't betray your stupidity! It's not rocket science!
Removed by mod
user report: Abusing Disengage rule
A call do disengage must be the only thing in the post. You don't get to respond to people and then call to disengage, this is completely disingenuous.
I think it's about time we defed from your garbage instance, and I'm glad to make sure you won't be showing you're entire ass around here again.
There you go again, proposing a hypothetical as if it is real. Again you don't understand what words actually mean. How is this 'rage-bait'? Who is profiting off of the advertising that makes something 'rage-bait'? It was a dumb moderation wording decision that we are collectively making fun of because we have a shared understanding of the meaning of a term. This isn't complicated.
Holy shit, dude you're just like every other tough-face poster, "I don't care, but I took time out of my day to call your posting habits unhealthy." Bro, of course you care, stop fronting! If you didn't care you wouldn't engage at all!
And you are following a post to an unrelated community to defend your moderation policies as if our opinions matter in the slightest to what is going on in your community. Why do you care what we think?
You really don't get how this works, do you? You don't get to insult people and then say 'Disengage'. That's not good forum behavior, that is disingenuous horseshit.
Removed by mod
Stop using words you don't understand. It is not 'projecting' to point out you doing bad-faith posting. The forum rules are that if you want me to disengage all you have to do is post under me 'Disengage'. That is it. If you include any other bullshit, especially insults, that is not considered acceptable, you are just abusing the rules of disengagement to get the last word it. This has been the rule on most forum posting for fucking forever.
'Rage-bait' is specifically a term used to describe posting that is meant to drive engagement for advertising models. I have a buddy who specifically makes rage bait around NFL content. It specifically describes that behavior. It is not 'getting mad or making fun of shit online', because that is literally just the Internet, especially forum posting since it's inception. Back in the day, we would catchall of that with 'trolling'.
Why should I care if you want to stop my 'toxic habits'? How does you wanting to stop those habits have any relevance on the conversation? Listen to yourself, you are talking as if you have any power to stop me even if you did care. Your care, in that regard, is completely irrelevant. A weird power-trip.
Being autistic is not a reason. It's deferring your reasoning onto your neuro-divergency. We aren't slandering you. Someone calling that person a tankie for some dumb shit happened! And even if we did slander you, what would you coming along to 'correct the record' do, especially if you come in with the assumption that we are all 'toxic posters who circle jerk at rage-bait'? How is coming along in bad-faith helpful to you having a reasonable discussion with us?
Removed by mod
You literally came in calling it a '2-minute hate', am I really supposed to believe that you were just coming in to 'correct the record'?
I know it's unfortunate to your whole thing, but words have meaning and diluting them to whatever your rhetorical preference is at any given moment is literally what we are making fun of on this post.
I haven't seen a level of denial like this in a long time. Implying you don't care in general, then altering specifically saying that you don't care about changing my toxic posting, then getting confused when I say that is a weird power-trip if you did care about changing my toxic posting is an interesting strategy. We'll see if it works for you.
Wow, I didn't want to accuse you of using autism as a shield from criticism, but damn, stop using your autism as a shield from criticism. I think you should really dig into why you feel this need for control over a narrative that doesn't actually matter, especially if we are all just projecting bad-faith actors like you say. It would be nice if you could pick a lane and stick with it as to exactly what you think we are.
You had zero success with anyone else on the forum. It's genuinely sad that you think you did.
Edit: Damn, he got got by moderation. Just as the conversation was becoming productive!
I'm not a mod, but my understanding of the disengagement rule is that it's supposed to just be "disengage" not a whole message "getting the last word in". Not accusing you of doing that, but that's how I understand the rule.
Correct. Oftentimes we disagree on dumb shit, and the best course of action is to not let it devolve into childs' play.
You can't be a ePiCuReAn ReVoLuTiOnArY lIbErTaRiAn SoCiAlIsT and spam shit like this and then end the last line w/ "disengage" as if they can't now respond to the 3 paragraphs of text.
It's insanely bad-faith.
I completely agree with you, it is very bad faith. Since he's an admin I tried to be nice and assume the best, but returning to this thread I see it didn't really matter
(when I made my comment it showed as his being the last in thread and not removed)
Didn't this happen last time too?
I say it's related, you say it's unrelated, no point arguing.
Did you read the comments (both mine and of others?) we are just chatting, no salt down here. You think I'm salty, I think I'm not.
My post won't be reinstated, but we had a cheap laugh at the expense of your mod and had some sane discussions between ourselves, as far as I'm concerned this is a net win for me. You'll think we are all just a bunch of salty lunatics and that's your opinion.
There's no point arguing when both sides have unreconcilable viewpoints, our conversation ends here. Disengage.
Hey, not a moderator, but next time you want to disengage on hexbear, just post 'disengage' with nothing else. I don't think you did anything strictly incorrect here, but we need to keep the rules clear for people like db0.
Got it, wanted to clarify that we have different unreconcilable viewpoints and all that stuff, still learning this hexbear thing. I'll keep it in mind for the next time.
Edit: accidentally sent a couple extra comments
S'all good!
deleted by creator
Thanks for the chilled response. I don't think it's an event that will result in much on its own, but it is a silly attitude.
"unrelated to piracy" when it's directly related to piracy, objecting to calling out the privilege of first-world people to be largely pro-corporate, and the fashionable name-calling of "tankie" does make for a triple whammy of lib-type silliness.
I'm sure we shall all get over it.
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
Why would they say that when they ban people precisely for having different ideas from them?
deleted by creator
Cope.
This isn't hate. Your mod did something stupid and we're making fun of them for it.
1974 reference
:: shits pants ::
Wow, y'all really need to chill
Oh look, the kid with 0 ability to moderate his bot problem deciding to fight the lefties instead of somebody to the right of "hunt the poors for sport"
Fuck off w/ this nonsense 🤑🥾
This really tickled me because I remember db0 from Reddit being a moderator on anarchist subs for long enough that those credentials are old enough that they are well into their teen years themselves.
They absolutely must be in their 30s by now. If we say that they've been a moderator on Reddit for 15 years and that they became a mod at the ripe old age of 15, both of which are undeniably conservative estimates, then that makes them 30 years old.
I just had to chuckle when I saw you call them kid because I am pretty confident they're middle-aged by this point and I knew this offhand.
Why is it that every time I see good takes from your instance it's typically some random user in opposition to the rest, and every time I see the worst takes imaginable from your instance it's usually from you personally?