A few points from someone who knows how this works.
Everyone has been “banned” from multiple places. Nobody has a perfect score. But that’s just defederation for you. Whether they’re even “bans” or not is technical.
What you point to are technicalities, ones which have been brigaded upon me constantly by you and others who show the signs of being “alts” in all but name. Sometimes you phrase it as “she is a Nazi” just because you know you’re speaking to the right audience to demonize me when none of that applies. The second thing is also inapplicable here in the way you are applying it, for the same reasons. I don’t defend harassment. I don’t defend racism, ableism, transphobia, or homophobia. I don’t defend marginalization. Get that out of your head.
If all the signs are right about who you are, not only are you banevading to try to tell us all of this, but you’re also someone who even people in charge have had to point out tries to weaponize the karma system to make those you have a grudge on seem worse than they are.
Lol, honestly is better to let the ship sink than accepting controversial people as a mod. Also, not everyone has being banned from multiples places wtf
Whole instances have banned each other. And it’s not really uncommon for people to be banned from multiple places. It’s a rite of passage to be banned by ML, for example.
One thing is to ban an instance, another one is to be banned individually and no, it’s not a rite of passage. I’ve been here since the first mass migration and didn’t got a single ban, such as most people who are not out there searching for conflict
Meh. I got sitebanned on lemmygrad on like day five. “NATO Apologist” for, *checks notes*, considering Ukraine a sovereign nation. I don’t even like NATO, too much US in there. Anyway:
OP is right in the sense that it isn’t hard to catch a ban on lemmy, also that there’s plenty of places that will ban you for diametrically opposed things so expressing an opinion will inevitably catch you a ban (like, most places ban you for denying genocide, lemmygrad will do so for not denying genocide).
It does matter what you get banned for. And defending kiwifarms is a no-go for any civilised community.
The context behind the last part is that certain marginalized friends wanted someone on the inside to act as a buffer in case they come up in conversations, and it led to a whole debate about whether the intentions of the founders of a community, the intentions of the majority of a community, and the intentions of each individual in a community can be separated. I am an individual and don’t endorse the values the group is associated with. I previously used the analogy of an alternate timeline where nobody likes Uncle Iroh because he joined the fire nation military even though he never actually did any of the fighting. It’s an oversimplification to say I’m “defending kiwifarms”.
I’m not searching for conflict. The people you allude to keep coming to me. I didn’t really even know your name before you came to me, for example. Besides, I’m not the only one who has offered to fill the shoes. If everyone got lucky with that except me, I would still support them.
Basically eliminating a people for being in a certain naturally occurring human group.
The British often selected their targets of war based on who could sustain them the most with slaves. That could be called genocide.
Japan has disability-based infanticide ingrained in its cultural practices. That could be called genocide.
Israel and Palestine have both done some horrid things to each other and deprived each other of basic needs. That isn’t something where genocide comes to mind.
There is a difference between agenda-based war and wishing to dissect a land’s demographics.
Israel and Palestine have both done some horrid things to each other and deprived each other of basic needs. That isn’t something where genocide comes to mind.
What Israel is doing to Palestine IS a genocide. there’s no debate about that
It’s a war crime. Not all war crimes are a genocide. Certain criteria have to be fulfilled for that. Similar to how not all mass shootings are acts of terrorism. Are you really dedicating a whole confrontation just to debate semantics?
I’m going by dictionary definitions, not what acertainbiasedorganization says. I wouldn’t deny both of the organizations you mention there are biased. But the dictionary isn’t.
Suppose you are right and the ADL is biased and controlled “by Zionism” (which sounds a bit like a conspiracy theory). What does that make the Snopes organization? What does that make the literal 50% of America who doesn’t disagree with the ADL? What does that make the people who call it a double standard that so many people are willing to support murder of one kind but not another, or that intentions matter sometimes but not all the time?
A few points from someone who knows how this works.
Lol, honestly is better to let the ship sink than accepting controversial people as a mod. Also, not everyone has being banned from multiples places wtf
Whole instances have banned each other. And it’s not really uncommon for people to be banned from multiple places. It’s a rite of passage to be banned by ML, for example.
One thing is to ban an instance, another one is to be banned individually and no, it’s not a rite of passage. I’ve been here since the first mass migration and didn’t got a single ban, such as most people who are not out there searching for conflict
Meh. I got sitebanned on lemmygrad on like day five. “NATO Apologist” for, *checks notes*, considering Ukraine a sovereign nation. I don’t even like NATO, too much US in there. Anyway:
OP is right in the sense that it isn’t hard to catch a ban on lemmy, also that there’s plenty of places that will ban you for diametrically opposed things so expressing an opinion will inevitably catch you a ban (like, most places ban you for denying genocide, lemmygrad will do so for not denying genocide).
It does matter what you get banned for. And defending kiwifarms is a no-go for any civilised community.
The context behind the last part is that certain marginalized friends wanted someone on the inside to act as a buffer in case they come up in conversations, and it led to a whole debate about whether the intentions of the founders of a community, the intentions of the majority of a community, and the intentions of each individual in a community can be separated. I am an individual and don’t endorse the values the group is associated with. I previously used the analogy of an alternate timeline where nobody likes Uncle Iroh because he joined the fire nation military even though he never actually did any of the fighting. It’s an oversimplification to say I’m “defending kiwifarms”.
I’m not searching for conflict. The people you allude to keep coming to me. I didn’t really even know your name before you came to me, for example. Besides, I’m not the only one who has offered to fill the shoes. If everyone got lucky with that except me, I would still support them.
This is my first account on Lemmy after lurking it for several months. Not everyone who is against Kiwifarms is the same person lol
You do realize that simply linking to something in a place like that once isn’t the same as being that individual, right?
OK genocide denier 😂
How is that genocide denial?
What Israel is doing to Palestine IS a genocide. there’s no debate about that
It’s a war crime. Not all war crimes are a genocide. Certain criteria have to be fulfilled for that. Similar to how not all mass shootings are acts of terrorism. Are you really dedicating a whole confrontation just to debate semantics?
😂 it ain’t semantics, it’s facts. ADL is a Zionist source and is unreliable btw
Amnesty International investigation concludes Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza
I’m going by dictionary definitions, not what a certain biased organization says. I wouldn’t deny both of the organizations you mention there are biased. But the dictionary isn’t.
Suppose you are right and the ADL is biased and controlled “by Zionism” (which sounds a bit like a conspiracy theory). What does that make the Snopes organization? What does that make the literal 50% of America who doesn’t disagree with the ADL? What does that make the people who call it a double standard that so many people are willing to support murder of one kind but not another, or that intentions matter sometimes but not all the time?