obviously wreckers, I’m saying when longtime posters like congressball,wtypstan, and basedball (THE FIRST TIME, IK HE TURNED INTO A WRECKER) get perma’d for one off collar or unintentionally offensive post it just seems a bit too harsh
ig, idk I think my mod philosophy just differs I understand the Hitler ban from your pov, error on the side of caution sure. But on the wider topic as a mod it made more sense to me to only perma the outright bigots, reactionaries and dickheads and give warnings/temps to posters who are normally fine but unintentionally cross a line here and there. Otherwise you have a problem that is decently pervasive here where people create alts for posting opinions that might differ from a majority about things like the CPC, North Korea, scalability of anarchism or other controversial topics in left spaces. While not bigoted or reactionary ppl still are afraid of getting perma’d bc a mod could disagree.
I don’t think that’s a great vibe, but it could easily be solved with warnings or temps imo :meow-hug:
well according to the rules of the site ban evasion is ban worthy, this is my first account obviously :D, but banning someone is telling them they are not welcome and they are an objectively bad person, plus kinda alienates you
Removed by mod
:amogus:
it’s not like I’m being inflammatory or anything, just stating my personal perception.
obviously in a community like this I’d rather reactionaries get banned than not, but for example there have been ppl like congressball, wtypstan and such who were wrongly permabanned and had to appeal to get unbanned. (i only say wrongly bc if it wasn’t then they would still be banned right?)
Idk over banning in my experience can smother a community esp since the ppl that post the most are in the most danger of getting perma’d without a temp ban solution
ok, I just thought it was a possibility bc I’ve seen accounts banned in the mod log for ban evasion without any identifiable reason to me
i think having so many wreckers / reactionaries attacking the site frequently have made the mods a bit too ban happy. This in conjunction with the fact we don’t have temp bans for lesser infractions means that the punishment for something minor or accidental is the same as outright hate speech and targeted harassment of users, permaban cy@ :p
Well this was a year ago and they don’t sell animal food products anymore. They still sell apparel from cows and horses that died naturally, which I don’t have a HUGE issue with since in my culture making full use of a deceased animal is a sign of respect in a way, the animal still lives on past it’s death.
But most farmers and community members buy their jackets, scarves, baskets, and such since they are legitimately well made and supports them.
Yeah, I’m kinda directing this as a convo about the wider vegan movement, and some people here that over emphasize the importance of the diet in relation to direct action. Obviously GO VEGAN, but some people have actual needs for non-vegan medicines/have mental issues like OCD or autism that make a large change like that extremely difficult
I’m vegan but attacking / banning comrades who are ideologically aligned with animal liberation but differ in the aspects of how to achieve that confuses me since ultimately we share the same goal
a really small scale example of what I’m talking about is the Amish in my area have a little market where they sold milk/butter from their cows and eggs from their chickens aswell as handmade apparel to a few dozen people. Me and a few ppl got together and explained to them if they stopped selling animal products we would all buy their other stuff to make up for the loss
Sure it’s not exactly a huge thing but the cows/chickens weren’t as heavily strained. Since they weren’t producing for an extra 100 or so people. Plus the Amish treat them far better than any industrial farms.
The number of people going vegan does not out number the growing markets in developing countries. Major production companies are still gaining customers on a global scale due to globalization.
Obviously go vegan, but expecting real change out of nothing but a dietary choice is unrealistic. Direct action through other means like legislation etc. will be more effective both in the short and long term
On the small scale though I think it is effective. If you get your entire friend group or community to boycott a family restaurant that supplies the meat from their farm you will be having a real effect on those animals.
any robber in the US knows if they are entering an occupied house there is a good chance they will get shot. The problem comes when innocent ppl accidentally enter a house thinking it was their own and get blown away.
Also why rob a house when stores exist?
I think the only legit argument is consumer side activism works best on a small scale, where the impact is very clear and obvious. As it scales up the effect of your activism becomes obscured since the boycotters becomes a smaller % of the market.
Obviously veganism isn’t antimaterialist, but there has to be more than just consumer side activism when you are on the scale of nationwide/global distribution.
“AN EFFECT” yes, a large effect on a growing market with billions of customers I don’t believe so. I’m not saying going vegan isn’t a good thing, I’m simply saying that it is not very impactful compared to other direct actions. The global markets are expanding to the billions in the global south, where veganism is not as prominent, therefore these global corporations will not really see an impact profits wise due to prominence of veganism in the global north. Therefore I think we need to focus on more drastic action than simply a diet change