I honestly have never found a better way to keep the pickle water from getting my buns all soggy and was just trying to share.

That community's last post was 2 months ago, and the post before that 5 months ago. I can see why... the mods.

I posted this thread, without issues. A year later, I finally got a really insightful reply that wholly answered my question well:

https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/39819472/25666072

Now it is “Removed by mod”. But I am the mod.. the only mod (wtf?). No, I do not have multiple personality disorder as the modlog shows.

So somewhere, someone booted that user. That had a ripple effect of destroying all that user’s content. So then I found a “restore content” button, used it, and had to give a reason. I thought I would just be sending myself a useless alert, but it actually restored the content.

So it’s fixed to some extent. But I would like to understand more about what happened. I cannot tell from that user’s modlog who banned them, or even which instance did the banishment. It may be true that it was an anti-spam control, and perhaps rightful, but it’s a bit fucked up how it killed all that user’s content when obviously some of it was useful.

I have seen this before in communities I moderate where a comment is gone because a user is banned. I never looked further. But now it’S clear this is not optimum. It was only in the case at hand that a user’s comment was useful enough that I remembered it, and it happened to be recent.

Clearly this is a bug: I am given the option to “restore comment” but I cannot review the comment before clicking that. So how can I first give a reason for restoring the comment if I am restoring it just to see if it should be restored?

Posted this. Got censored. Rightfully so, or trigger happy mod?

I blocked the dude who kept pinging me a handful of minutes before I got banned, so I can't get his contributions to appear correctly in my screenshots, but I'm sure you can figure out where to look.

I basically called Hassan Piker a degenerate liability, and this really rocked some guy's world, and he kept trying to convince me I was wrong. I really don't give a shit, so doing as someone normal with normal life priorities does, I forgot about it all. 2 days later he started rezzing the thread saying he was waiting for proof of my opinion.

I informed him of how what he was doing looked (i.e. pathetic), and I was banned for personal attacks. Now I can't respond with movie screenshots to other threads.

Mod censored nothing yet but locked a thread that informed the zerowaste community that charities have recently started rejecting pre-spychip hardware, and as a consequence the hardware is being destroyed. This is not just any e-waste. It’s hardware that is irreplaceable because no consumer-grade chipmakers are currently making spychip-free processors anymore.

I don’t give a shit that the thread was locked. The abuse of power is in deciding for everyone to ban future posts about e-waste (and prevention thereof) w.r.t pre-spychips -- a limited resource. It’s anti-thetical to the zerowaste mission of the community.

Note as well that no sidebar rule was created. So looks like it will be a kind of non-transparent selective enforcement. When mods have undisclosed rules, it’s a red flag for shananigans. People should know what rules are in play. It’s part of making a decision on whether a community is true to its superficial values.

As you can see in the screenshot below, I actually upclicked the content in question

I think this whole news community exists purely for the purpose of abuse, and I should've known- it's in the name! A community where you're not allowed to apologize?? Ridiculous.

update

Mr. Down has been sacked

cross-posted from: https://futurology.today/post/11928906

Banned from multiple communities I never heard of because I criticized a pro-AI mod

Pro-AI mod bans me from a bunch of communities I never even heard of because he didn't like my criticism of the fake slop that isn't art which he posts.

PREVIOUSLY: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/57924891

I stepped down as the steward of the Funhole Union of Content Creators earlier in August, https://lemmy.sdf.org/comment/23862507 . My last order of business was the announcement of the MOST PROLIFIC DOWNCLICKER AWARD https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/57152172 .

I have always been very vocal about the value of downclicks, despite the sharp opposition from both FUCC members and outside. I fought hard to keep both arrow engagements at equal values. The award's goal is to celebrate genuine downclickers, their philosophy, and in general - the first amendment. The competition is still ongoing, and the winner will be announced by the current FUCC administration sometime in September.

How does this tie in to the Abuse of my Moderator?

Ever since my role in FUCC was diminished, opportunists saw it as a chance to bring about a forceful change to the engagement economy - a subversive attempt behind the scenes to increase the value of upclicks at the cost of decreasing the value of downclicks through arbitrary downclicking engagement. My moderator is an unfortunate victim of market manipulation, targeted due to his role as the founding father of content creation, which directly lead to the creation of the engagement market.

It is an unfortunate truth that all content creators would benefit from a crash in downclick value. Despite one of the main core tenets of FUCC being that 'all arrow engagement methods are worth exactly 1', as I've hinted at before, behind closed doors, there are many who disagree, and would love to see it changed.

While it is difficult to prove, I believe the downclicking campaign against my moderator is attempting to do just that, and by extension to influence the The Most Prolific Downclicker Award, and to relegate genuine downclickers to the status of second class lemmy citizens.

While I no longer have any say in the decisions behind FUCC's competitions and awards, this burden now falls into the lap of the current FUCC administration, I have suggested to the current steward to exclude all nominated users of lemmy instances that partake in my moderator's downclicking campaign from any future and ongoing Engagement competitions until the abuse is resolved.

The coveted price for the first place of the Most Prolific Downclicker Award must not fall into the hands of market manipulators.

Thank you for your support.

I'm a little bit tired of getting abused every time I come here to report abuse.

They are breaking their own rules by making things up and sending their goons to harrass with false allegations of rape.

https://feddit.online/about

cross-posted from: https://quokk.au/c/fediverse/p/1104590/rimu-instantly-deletes-comment-showing-other-side-of-story

Rimu instantly deletes comment showing other side of story

Rimu recently started a new rant thread. I copied the response of the person they had targeted and in less than a minute Rimu had deleted the comment.

This is the comment Rimu did not want people being able to see:
https://feddit.uk/post/53824748/26875911

This is the thread I shared it on:
https://feddit.uk/post/53824747

unfortunately i ran out of characters to tell you which subreddit it was

https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/57319079

The cowardly mod https://lemmy.world/u/notwesker@lemmy.sdf.org of this very community is going around banning people for "rule 1 victim blaming" when there is clearly no such rule nor would that be the first on a list of community rules.

Not Dr. Wesker@lemmy.sdf.org is a coward who is too scared to let users engage with each other if it threatens their carefully curated narrative.

Said narrative is weak sauce held together by clear tape "banned for rule 1. victim blaming" in response to "shut up" is just self defeating only a complete imbecile with the insecurity of a child could think this is appropriate.

No such rule should exist unless in a survivors community and especially not a community where blame is the point.

https://lemmy.zip/c/funhole@lemmy.sdf.org

https://lemmy.zip/u/qrstuv@lemmy.sdf.org

https://lemmy.zip/modlog?page=1&actionType=All&userId=25927

@Demigodrick@lemmy.zip @v4ld1z@lemmy.zip @ZippyBot@lemmy.zip @gazby@lemmy.zip @Schwim@lemmy.zip

I've never said "Permanently Deleted" to anyone in my life. Even though I don't remember saying that, I'm quite certain I do remember not saying that.

That instance is supposed to be about Shit Just Works, but obviously it's not. I won't stand for this. I will sit down for this, but I won't stand for it.

Tomorrow I may not remember posting stuff, but I'll remember what I didn't say.

They're censoring as many as 47 people per week from accessing information on organic food.

https://lemmy.cafe/u/qrstuv@lemmy.sdf.org

https://lemmy.cafe/modlog?page=46&actionType=ModBan

https://archive.ph/2026.08.06-060356/https://lemmy.cafe/modlog?page=46&actionType=ModBan (same as above, just an heirloom link)

@Illecors@lemmy.cafe

@Gemini@lemmy.cafe

@FartInTheWind@lemmy.cafe

@bahmanm@lemmy.cafe

https://lemmy.today/modlog?page=1&actionType=All&userId=1219858

https://lemmy.today/c/robotics

https://lemmy.today/c/retrofuture

https://lemmy.today/c/punkmusic

https://lemmy.today/c/retroshorts

https://lemmy.today/c/vibecoders

https://lemmy.today/c/running

https://lemmy.today/c/loveai

https://lemmy.today/u/PapaSkwat

https://lemmy.today/u/PapaSkwat@lemmy.wtf

https://lemmy.today/u/PapaSkwat@discuss.online

If it's good enough for Jesus it's good enough for people like you and people like me especially trash people. I explicitly said trash people. Not just people. Context matters!

This person never posted once and this fascist mod banned them for downvoting

Everyone's favorite PTB, @flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com banned me from multiple communities and an entire unrelated instance for showing people that they make up reasons to ban people and protect their in-group.

This is not surprising, since they are by far the most ban-happy instance on fedi, and @flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com likes to ingest comment histories into an LLM to confirm their biases.

Here's the fun:

My favorite part is when they asked why I keep discussing pointless drama in the pointless drama community.

cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/44631447

For the record, @Lalla@slrpnk.net entered my thread to spout some finger-wagging threadcrap:

“Could we at least not use her deadname? I get that the article is old, but please don’t.”

I actually agree with using the proper new names of people in the present to address them in the present. But it’s stupid and disrespectful to drag someone’s new name through their history before they changed their identity. I believe my response to the threadcrap was quite civil. This is what @CurlyWurlies4All@slrpnk.net was surreptitiously censored:

“We are talking about Manning’s history. It is proper to use the name of the time of the events. People don’t create new identities for the hell of it. New identities are generally created for a new life going forward, to be disconnected from a past life.

Europe recognises the right to be forgotten which is enshrined in GDPR art.17. Guatamala respects people’s wishes to establish a new identity to the extent of allowing name changes with no public record in a closed-door session with a judge.

Tying someone’s new name to their prior history is disrespectful. Some may want their legacy to follow them despite a name change and we might guess Manning is proud of their accomplishment, but it’s not for you to decide what people with new identities carry forward from their past.

Please respect people’s privacy. I know Manning’s privacy is toast anyway, but it’s still off to be part of the intrusion and then to ask others to also drag new identities through their prior history.

You also advocate historic inaccuracy. Exxon (a dead name) discovered climate change. Not ExxonMobil. You cause confusion by insisting on refencing new identities in past events. If you say ExxonMobil discovered climate change in the 1960s, you falsely imply that ExxonMobil existed at that time. But in fact the merger (and thus new identity) came after that.

The modlog vaguely states “breaks rules” without citing a specific rule. This was coupled with the cowardess of not DMing me about the action.

The power abuse occurs alongside the decision to allow the rule-breaking threadcrap I defended from to persist. The mod doubles down on their oppression this way. The privacy-disrespecting finger-wag carries on in a community that inherently values privacy.

UPDATE: it was not the mod

Due to a defect in the Lemmy server software, it looked as if the moderator of enshitification did the censorship. But in fact it was the admin of an outside host (sopuli) who did the censorship, which yielded a modlog on slrpnk.net.

https://lemmy.sdf.org/c/news

Every thread has been locked and every person who has left a comment has been banned.

Has the mod decided to throw a childish tantrum?