mindbleach comments on We Will Miss Them Dearly!

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (6 children)

He doesn't seem to believe that. The root issue is, he treats any deviation from polite liberal norms as equally baseless and intolerable. When he says he's just, ugh, so tired of people freaking the fuck out over escalating fascism, he is completely sincere.

Dude writes stuff like "The worst part is that they're so caught up in their own self-righteousness that they can't see they're just as bad or worse than what they're spewing violent rhetoric at." Does that sound like he's worried about people in camps? Because to me it sounds like stock both-sides enlightened centrism. While one side is filling the camps.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] OpenStars@piefed.social 2 points 1 year ago (5 children)

He admits his neurodivergencey as the source of his need to curate his personal experience. He may be much happier in the more narrow scope of Beehaw.

I did not realize that he was a mod on a politics comm - with his mindset I would think that he would want to steer well clear of such. Though he is hardly the only one who gets mad at people who are self-righteous - that describes most of us fo sho, me included:-P. I also side with him that people advocating for outright murder here on Lemmy for fairly innocuous behaviors such as "not voting for Kamala Harris" (not supporting her hard enough?) is a bit much for my tastes - besides which it is a violation of Lemmy.World rules (is that where the politics comm was located? I still see his user account, and the list of things that he mods, and I do not see a politics one there?), as well as Dubvee rules, so I can well understand his frustration when people upon being told no simply create an alt and continue unabated.

THAT, as I understand it, is the #1 reason why he left - because people were being so unfriendly in that manner (which I suppose as a mod & admin he saw much more of than we do as mere users?). i.e. it was not merely words in the form of comments or actions in the form of downvotes that drove him away - it was the creation of alts to get around bans, a problem that Reddit is also dealing with and much more of a concern here on the Threadiverse. Consent means nothing to some people, who behave as if Might makes Right, and since the rest of the Threadiverse was not alignment with his thoughts on that topic, he noped out of it. As is his right - his instance, his rules.

I would hope that he did not take it further to censor real, legitimate opinions that were offered respectfully. I have seen no evidence of that so far. The point that I am trying to make here though is that it is not so much "what" people were advocating for (as you spoke to) but rather "how" they were going about doing so (ignoring consent, specifically to the point of overriding prior bans) that ticked him off (or least that is how his message reads to me).

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (4 children)

"Being told no" included one-strike instance bans for upvoting the wrong comment. No shit people don't keep their accounts. Lemmy as a whole is a place where you accumulate permanent impairment and have zero recognition for long-term positive behavior.

Calling that "might makes right" is fucking rich when we're talking about someone curating an entire instance's personal experiences. Inviting people in, to discuss whatever, and then slapping them left and right for speaking frankly about contentious subjects, is abusive behavior. It's not a knitting forum - politics are relevant, and politics are fucked. If you want to blame his innate demeanor then he was never the right kind of person to run an instance. As I said: borrowed time.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] OpenStars@piefed.social 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

That... sounds really odd, like maybe a coincidence, or at best that fact alerting Admiral Patrick to the presence of someone who might have been a ban evader, and then subsequent looking into that account provides additional evidence.

But if someone really believes this - and has the evidence backing it up - then I invite them to submit a post to !yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com where we love to discuss such matters.

Like, if that were true, then that would seem to make Admiral Patrick a horrible person?

Calling that "might makes right" is fucking rich when we're talking about someone curating an entire instance's personal experiences

Actually I meant it in the sense of being hypocritical - as in some people seem to act as if Might Makes Right, but only when it benefits themselves, though switching to the exact opposite when that would suit them instead. So e.g. they cry out "unfair!" when someone does not follow the rules against them, but then do not play "fair" themselves against others.

And where does this "invite people in" come from? I can't show a screenshot or point to the official rules anymore since dubvee is down, but his instance was notorious for having a Beehaw-like experience, so why then were people surprised when he enacted precisely those rules that he said, and then, enforce? I genuinely do not know what you mean here, can you provide a reference for me to read? You might be referencing the same "politics" comm that people here are talking about, but which I have searched for and cannot find. If that community was on Lemmy.World though, then wouldn't it explicitly be against the rules to evade a ban? I am not doubting your sentence (that begins with "Inviting people in"), I am questioning its relevance here to the matter that we are discussing?

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I am describing me.

One upvote was "condoning violence," and that was that.

And where does this “invite people in” come from?

... it's a forum. What else is federation for?

I dunno about political communities, but Admiral Patrick definitely moderated an Unpopular Opinions community. One of his last straws was surely a few weeks ago, when someone there was apathetic over that healthcare CEO getting murked. He was genuinely surprised how many people said: that's not unpopular. As if that was the same thing as fascist violence against minorities.

his instance was notorious for having a Beehaw-like experience, so why then were people surprised when he enacted precisely those rules that he said, and then, enforce?

People's unpleasant surprise is that notoriety. People are justifiably unhappy with heavy-handed censorship for bad reasons. A broken stair is not excused by its reputation. That's just restating the problem.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] OpenStars@piefed.social 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

Afaik, that is not how "federation" works. It presents itself that way, so it is indeed tricky, but if you, from sh.itjust.works, having been invited to sh.itjust.works, want to post in a community on dubvee, then it is not the rules of sh.itjust.works that apply, but rather those of dubvee.

Damn that does sound unfriendly though - I can only hope that you got caught up incorrectly in a sweep, which I admit sounds rough but that is how the Beehaw & dubvee instances choose to work, and it is their choice to do however they please on their own machines, bought and paid for by them not us. Lemmy.ml similarly does as it pleases, as too does Hexbear.net, and lemmygrad.ml, and lemm.ee at least used to, and so on. It gets more difficult when piecing them together via federation though, especially when conflicts arise - e.g. between lemmy.world and lemmy.ml.

I have long been an advocate for a FAR greater level of transparency about such things than currently exists. Like lemmy.ml simply says "A community of privacy and FOSS enthusiasts, run by Lemmy’s developers" - as if that explains why they ban people from communities that they have never even so much as heard of, if they ever say anything remotely negative (or not positive enough?) about Russia, China, or North Korea? Beehaw, on the other hand, has an intricately detailed explanation of their policies - so them enacting such should not be a "surprise" to anyone posting or commenting in one of those communities.

However, the Lemmy software is set up to mostly ignore those kinds of messages (while PieFed does a fantastic job of placing them onto every single page - even an individual post has the community side-bar visible), so the burden falls to you to have to figure out all the myriad little fiefdoms and rules of what is or is not allowed on the various instances. Good luck! (or switch to PieFed I guess) But my point there is that it was not Admiral Patrick's fault for "having rules", though he did set himself up to fail by (like Beehaw) making rules that did not align with those used elsewhere in the Threadiverse.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago*

Lemmy.ml similarly does as it pleases, as too does Hexbear.net, and lemmygrad.ml

Also a major problem, which people rightly condemn.

It is Admiral Patrick's fault for the rules being bad. The whole threadiverse could share those expectations, and they'd still be bullshit.

The man expected people to meet threats of violence from power without so much as harsh language. He'd blacklist everyone who touched the wrong comment. And apparently he took no joy in that. Presumably Dessalines gets a kick out of calling everyone sinophobic bootlickers. It might be why Lemmy exists. Admiral Patrick was horrified every time someone regarded a Nazi the same way that Nazi regards half of America.

The US government is gleefully bragging how they'll round up sixty-five million people, and this dude expected cocktail-party manners, in a crowd rife with potential victims. Lemmy's userbase is 90% in the first three "then they came fors."

The cult of civility is a failure of moderation. It pretends there's no good reason to treat someone badly. From anti-carcerial anarchist Quakers, I would at least respect self-consistency, but I think this schmuck's a progressive liberal like myself. Yet his response was never a grudging 'I can't let you say that.' It was always a harsh and unironic 'How dare you.' Big surprise he burned out. He set himself up to fail by having a worldview that collided with reality and zero chill.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent