24
[meta] pls stop banning people (discuss.tchncs.de)
submitted 10 months ago by to c/comicstrips@lemmy.world
29 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I noticed in the last few days, at least two very active posters got banned:

They are probably new people here trying out the fediverse because a friend recommended it to them, seeing that it's lal not-so-active as they're used from other sites, trying to populate it with content, and getting banned for it.

As far as i can see, they didn't post highly-controversial stuff or sth. Just random and sometimes slightly-critical-of-society (but not very critical of society) comics, just as good comics should do IMO. I don't see why they got banned?

This is not how the fediverse becomes popular among the population. This is how to convey an elitist look of "being sceptical towards new users".

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] 6 points 9 months ago* (3 children)

In that case I have a few doubts:

  1. Why is the given ban reason for these accounts "bot", when that doesn't describe the actual issue here, and why isn't there a clear transparent explanation how these accounts were identified as part of this self-destruction scheme?
  2. What exactly is the issue with self-destructing accounts other than losing the comments, discussions, etc. associated with the posts? Because if that's the only thing, I don't see the severity.
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [โ€“] 14 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

    What exactly is the issue with self-destructing accounts other than losing the comments, discussions, etc. associated with the posts? Because if that's the only thing, I don't see the severity.

    It's unfair to anyone and everyone who participates. It's a PITA to save a post to have it just disappear later. Or remember a post and want to go back to it only to find it self-nuked. Yeah, some stuff may get modded but at least there's a usually correct and valid reason attached. The people doing this and self-destructing are basically unmarked spambots. I fucking hate bots.

    The disposable troll account elsewhere in the comments here said "Content is king" which is the only thing in their statement I agree with. Well, when that content is ephemeral, then it's not really "content".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [โ€“] 5 points 9 months ago

    I can see the issue with spam-bots, regardless of the self-nuking, and how especially this community is targeted. But I wouldn't consider the accounts marked in this post as spam-bots at all.

    If this community or instance considers a couple of posts a day, perhaps specifically from new users, spamming, then as a user I'd expect that rule to be written before actions are taken.

    In general, I'm not disputing the actions of the mods and I hate to be the guy who expects something from people who contribute to this platform in their free-time, but for these kind of bans based on suspicions and patterns, I just wish there would at least be more transparent communication.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [โ€“] 3 points 9 months ago

    when that content is ephemeral, then itโ€™s not really โ€œcontentโ€.

    I personally agree, but I can see how others might not. I never used 4chan, but wasn't it like that? People used temporary names, and content was deleted after a short while?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent