you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 62 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Ahhhh, the "when they go low, we go high" approach.
    Gee whizz, that approach has really been working out so far, hasn't it...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 101 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (32 children)

    So if we celebrated hitler's death we lack humanity? People should be free to celebrate a death if they feel to. Forcing your idea of a moral code over people is not nice. We are not talking about celebrating violence, a crime or wishing for somebody's death.

    People should be free to express their feelings if they don't hurt anyone, without having to fear the morality police. The point of modorators should be to create a welcoming and safe space, not to impose your morality on others.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 32 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 19 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    You should answer the question posed though…

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago* (2 children)

    Dodging questions is a bad look, especially ones that illustrate your point is flawed. I would just say no, it’s only “loaded” if you’re position isn’t defendable

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 34 points 3 months ago (11 children)

    Yes, and you could have answered "thanks for your input, but we are going to stick with our rules because we have our reasons", instead you basically tell me "Doesn't matter what you think, these are the rules and you must respect them. No discussion allowed". I mean sure, you make the rules, but the way you enforce them and react to criticism speaks for itself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    I think the larger point is maybe you shouldn't be allowed to, because you've admitted to arbitrarily suspending that rule when someone YOU are fine celebrating dies, like Kissinger.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 13 points 3 months ago (11 children)

    No, no, you don’t get it. It’s not about being nice, it’s about telegraphing what a good, nonthreatening supplicant you are

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 24 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    You wrote the words “basic humanity” as if that was supposed to make sense as a justification for a rule. Don’t think we’ve seen a reason.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 24 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    I have empathy for the people whose lives were made miserable by republican policies graham championed and I celebrate one less champion of those policies fucking people over

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    those policies killed people

    not just made miserable

    fucking killed

    but we’re not supposed to be happy he’s dead?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago*

    he was able to do so with the consent of a majority of the House, Senate and President.

    So he was still a bad person but also other people agreed with him and enabled him to do bad stuff

    This is like saying "Jeff was not a bad person, they would restrain him so he couldn't kill, while Josh was a very bad person because he could kill without restriction"

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    It might help you understand WHY you're getting ratioed if you understand this:

    Lindsay Graham was basically a serial killer who used votes rather than knives.

    Imagine a serial killer murdered someone you love. Wouldn't you cheer when you find out he's died? Wouldn't you be happy he is dead and no longer able to harm others the way he harmed your loved one?

    That's how we feel about Graham dying. That's what we're celebrating. Graham is the serial killer who murdered our mama, and we're happy to see him die.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 10 points 3 months ago

    No. This high road bullshit is why we are in the hole we’re in now. You want to play the game, you need to understand the rules. And you naive to think anything else.

    I won’t condone murder, but this fucker deserves his abrupt death and the vitriol that follows. We will always be at the mercy of those fucks because of people like you and it’s time you understand.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 28 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Would you celebrate the death of Hitler?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 3 months ago (22 children)

    Not positive that you should be enforcing your own personal ethics onto other people. Free speech should be a thing. If a person did bad things and people are glad that he is no longer in a position to do bad things, that is a celebration in itself. Trying to enforce opinions like this is self-congratulatory in that you consider your opinion is superior and worthy of judicial enforcement.

    Note that I haven't in the slightest commented on the man himself, yet still run the risk of banning. It all depends upon the moderator. This happens on Reddit all the time and that's the problem with this kind of moderation. It has a chilling effect. Give a censor a job and they tend to censor.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (15 children)

    Lol welcome to lemmy politics.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago (12 children)

    True, I should probably quit social media altogether. Having opinions is never welcome unless they are authorised opinions.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (11 children)

    Just find a better instance. We're having a crab rave over on .ml about this war criminal's death.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    ml is hardly innocent of policing opinions

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    ML is full thought police. You get banned for saying that democrats are a better option than republicans because it's liberal apologism or some other dumb fuckin shit, and all the heavy hitters just spam gpt slop twisting communist theory to explain why the total breakdown of society is actually a good thing, it's fuckin crazy over there. If dessalines sees this comment he'd instance ban me. World is shit but ML is a fuckin joke.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    Help a boomer out... How do I change instances?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    You just make an account on a different instance. Lemmy instances are kind of like email providers. You can have a slickgoat@lemmy.world, slickgoat@lemmy.dbzer0.com, slickgoat@lemmy.ml, etc… Different instances will tend to have very different admin styles. You also still need to follow the rules for whatever local community you’re on as well. So using this thread as an example, I’m on lemmy.dbzer0.com but I still need to follow the local mod’s “no celebrating death” rule. As long as they’re federated with the same instances, you’ll be able to see all the same content.

    lemmy.world tends to be many users’ first instance, simply because .world was one of the few instances that kept open registrations during the biggest Reddit migration. So it’s the largest, simply because it’s where most of the new users landed. But it is also frequently looked down on by other instances, because the .world mods tend to skew farther right than lots of Lemmy users prefer.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Mate, that was so generous of you to go to so much trouble to explain all that. I've been on this thing for a while now, and yours is the first explanation to make sense.

    Very much appreciated.

    Cheers,

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    I do agree that censorship and freedom of speech are related to how a government deals with the matter, so you are right.

    However, free speech principles have, thankfully, escaped the confines of government control. People generally like to express an opinion and hear others - particularly on private platforms that are supposedly set up for that express purpose. Sure, set of terms of service putting arbitrary guard rails on ethical grounds (one's own) and see what that gets you in the long run.

    Most of us already know the extremities of free speech. Saying 'great' when a douchebag stops being a douchebag is hardly ban worthy.

    Or maybe it is, and if so, welcome to your weather channel.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • [–] 69 points 3 months ago (11 children)

    Jesus fucking Christ. We’re really doing this high road virtue signaling bullshit here, too? Cool. Continue being part of the problem, I guess.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 20 points 3 months ago (9 children)

    Is there a rule about talking about disliking it? I don’t see one in writing, but it seems like it wouldn’t matter.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 13 points 3 months ago*

    Ok agreed. No surprise night raping or murdering people in colonial genocide projects that Graham Cracker. I hope we'll all live to celebrate that fucker dying some day too.

    Now on the celebrations.

  • source
  • parent