Since yesterday, Jordanlund is continuing to remove reporting like that from the reputed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drop_Site_News (article depicted in the screenshot is https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/israeli-spy-yoni-koren-stayed-jeffrey-epstein-apartment-ehud-barak?utm_source=publication-search) just for being hosted with substack. He is now moderating World News and Politics at lemmy.world.

Yes, legitimate news sites use Blogging platforms, they also use Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube and we don't allow those links either.

goodness, that is not the point. That means these outlets post to their own website while also reposting the thing on twitter. In so many cases, their own website uses substack/wordpress! For example, https://time.com is the official website of Time magazine, as in the publisher of Time Person of the Year. It uses WordPress, as you can see by going to https://time.com/wp-admin/.

If he wants to target blogspam, he should be targeting things like The Daily Beast and https://www.utubepublisher.in/, which use none of the technologies he's targeting. This ban on CMS technology is arbitrary and does not prevent poor publishing that simply registers a domain, as anyone may register a domain.

4 hours ago, Jordanlund comments "Blogsites, including substack, are not allowed." on the post "Israeli Spy Stayed for Weeks at a Time at Jeffrey Epstein's apartment "

all 69 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 22 points 10 months ago (13 children)

Christ, he's still a moderator over there? What a joke of an administration. Guess they expected us to forget how much of a dishonest piece of shit Jordan is, or that he'd somehow change his ways despite how obvious it is that he has no intention of doing so.

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 10 months ago (10 children)

    At this point I'm inclined to believe Jordan just is the admin, the admin is an alt account of Jordan.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 10 months ago (6 children)

    Worst than that, they realize he's the only one who will do exactly what they ask for and tons of free mod work

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] [S] 12 points 10 months ago* (5 children)

    he was removed from the modlists for 3 months now, and things have been just fine afaik, until two days ago when he suddenly started modding again

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    I was only removed from, I think 2 communities? Been modding the rest all along.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 10 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 7 points 10 months ago

    I don't think it's fair to single out Jordan. It's the entire admin and much of the mods. .world could rework their rules at any time but they don't. There's a reason for it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    Yeah I don't agree with that policy either, it makes little sense to me. Many "establishment" media publications are just as full of one-sided horseshit as a lot of the alt media platforms. But anyway, whatever I think, it is nonetheless a longstanding policy of that community afaik and so long as Jordan is in charge it's unlikely to ever change.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 10 months ago* (2 children)

    Some of the substack "blogs" he's removed who did everything to mitigate all his prejudaces against blogs were even journalists who refused to concede their voice to capital and are freelancing and self publishing now. Like he's basically one step away from saying that ProPublica is "just a blog" and refusing any of their reporting on news stories (often stories that they are the only publication talking about). It creates a MASSIVE blind spot in !worldnews@lemmy.world 's feed about what is and isn't worthwhile knowledge about current events to have. It ultimately only feeds the right wing outrage machine even if it's only sticking to the centrist position of the outrage machine

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 10 months ago

    It doesn't matter what an individual Substack blog does or doesn't do. The reason there's a blanket rule is we aren't going to engage in "But, but, you allowed this OTHER Substack blog, why not MIIIIIIIIIIINE??!?!? Mine is special! I'm special!"

    No, just... No. Rule 1 - No Blogs.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 10 months ago

    He's an egotistical asshole when questioned, especially about substack hosted content.

    In his eyes if he can find substack when searching the page it's enough to call it a blog.

    And according to the the admins of lemmy world this is perfectly acceptable if not encouraged behavior

  • source
  • [–] 23 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    I thought the issue with Substack was that they wouldn't remove nazi content?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 27 points 10 months ago* (24 children)

    Hardly PTB, though. If that's their rule and they're merely enforcing it. More a discussion whether their rules make any sense. But I'm not defending WorldNews and the mods. Just saying either have rules AND enforce them. Or don't make rules in the first place. Anything else is ridiculous.

  • source
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 10 months ago (23 children)

    The powertrip here is less the application of the rule and more the total unwillingness to adapt the rule. It's being used as a tool against legitimate news from legitimate sources. It could be confirmation bias, but I do not recall seeing widespread enforcement of this particular rule by moderators other than Jordan. If that is erroneous, then it's my mistake, but based on that I believe the inclusion of Substack in that list to be Jordan's pet contribution.

    If the other mods feel the same way, perhaps they'll make that known.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 10 months ago* (5 children)

    I get that. Unfortunately the Threadiverse is designed with almost no option to handle mods who don't listen or push weird agendas. Except one: to vote with our feet. In other words, leave said community. I already did that (a long time ago.) I wish we had more comfortable ways to address it, or let the community members shape their rules. But we sadly don't have that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] [S] 11 points 10 months ago* (4 children)

    I mean the entire design of Lemmy was just Reddit + "implement vote with feet feature". It seems effective and I don't really see what's wrong with it. Listening to the community is supposed to be the admins' job.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    And this particular mod has caused more than one mass exodus IIRC. Dot world admin DGAF.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    I mean they didn't care when a top level mod (who also wanted to promote flat earth on .world) said that being pro-palestine was antisemitic.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 10 months ago (16 children)

    The problem with adapting the rules is that the community is not a monoculture. If we adapt a rule for one person, then someone else wants a different change and another person wants another change and you end up in an endless cycle of "But what about MEEEEEEEE! You changed it for THEM!'

    The whole point of moderation is that SOMEONE has to have a spine and tell people "No." Unfortunately telling people no is not popular.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 10 months ago (13 children)

    I've done a fair bit of IRL and online moderation, this is a slippery slope argument and simply does not happen. Unless your referring to a natural evolution of a community, in which case the rules should serve the community and not the other way around.

    While I agree it's important to maintain a core goal/theme and modding is like steering a thankless pirate ship of sodomy, when saying No that No should support what the community needs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 10 months ago

    Note/FYI about Jordan. They are a massive asshole anywhere whenever they are questioned. Especially when evidence is shown that they are the one in the wrong, or in times substack is brought up, change until it fits what they want.

    Even better is when they can't even follow their own comms rules and are questioned🙃

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 10 months ago (11 children)

    We're already seeing it happen, the idea is to keep it from getting worse. 😉 The instant you start playing favorites with Substack blogs it will be why x but not y ad infinitum.

    So it's either allow all of it, including the garbage and bullshit, or block all of it.

    Mods are volunteers, we aren't paid to deal with "but why did you block my site and not theirs?" So we block all of it from certain sources.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 10 months ago (10 children)

    I am a mod, like I said.

    Do you mean that people complain or that they ask questions? Because "why that blog and not this one" is a reasonable question for a user to ask.

    A general rule about quality and misinformation gives you precedent to remove content that doesn't meet your criteria. And, let's face it, world news allows borderline tabloids that routinely publish misinformation so that bar is low.

    You're right, being a mod isn't paid. You can stop whenever you want if you don't like answering questions.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 10 months ago (9 children)

    You aren't a mod in !world@lemmy.world 😉

    I mod other communities and similarly don't have these problems. World is unique due to the size and the heated opinions (notably Gaza and Ukraine).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 10 months ago (8 children)

    Did you have an opinion on my comments, or did you just see an easy opening with "you aren't a mod of world?" and take the jab? Never said I was a mod there.

    World's size and genre don't have anything to do with my comments, and it's hard to believe users are as bad as you say when you still mod a bunch of big communities. Kind of infantilizing the way you talk about people in the comments, too.

    If I'm wrong, I'm down with hearing why.

    So, are they complaining, suggesting, or asking for clarity? And, like I said, World already allows poor journalism, so the ban on substack isn't really quality control.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 10 months ago* (7 children)

    It's very simple, World users break the rules, get modded, and run screaming to PTB.

    Citation? This entire thread. It's a unique animal different from others that I mod or you mod.

    Again, partly due to the size, but partly due to the heated nature of the content.

    People want, really want, to be the first to post something, even if it's a supremely shitty source or outside the bounds of the community. It gets modded and the reaction is "How dare you!"

    Yeah, how dare I mod a community, fuck me, right?

    Just tonight, I pulled one about Trump wanting to cancel the 2026 elections. Sorry, goes in !news@lemmy.world or !politics@lemmy.world , not World.

    But man, people will stretch and scream to make their point. Then the reaction is "Well, I don't like your rules, change them." How about "No." Don't like the rules? Go somewhere else. LOL.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 10 months ago* (6 children)

    This isn't the only platform I've had to moderate a community. I've had far more difficulty in IRL spaces where people can not only complain to my face, but through throwaway accounts and emails. I'm not speaking from a lack of experience.

    I can see why the news brings in some heated arguments, especially a community as big as world. Mine are small, yet I see disproportionate drama (and the occasional angry dm) about headlines and my rare mod actions.

    I can even relate to the difficulty treading the line with the rule on internal american news.

    But again, this reads like you really hate the users. People aren't running and screaming here, especially not in this post — It's someone with a legitimate concern and a reasoned argument, and, with as big a ship as World, people are going to have ideas about how to steer it. Opinions and questions aren't the same as an indignant "how dare you," framing it that way is disingenuous and speaks to how you view the people here. They're not a amorphous blob of hate, some are just folks wanting a honest conversation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 10 months ago (5 children)

    Oh, no, I don't hate the users in general. There are SPECIFIC users I hate, like that one asshole who comes out of nowhere with a new account, posts a dozen times, and deletes their account over and over and over again.

    I would say, of the mod actions I take, maybe 1 in 100 becomes a problem? Most people either take it like a grown up and move on with life or actually apologize and do better.

    But man, that 1 in 100...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 10 months ago (4 children)

    I find it difficult to hate anyone one here. We're all just trying to make sense of the world. I share stories of the small minority with my drama loving friends, so it's a positive in the end.

    In this situation, it's an obviously engaged user who genuinely wants to know more. I like people who are passionate about something enough to not only spend energy thinking about it, but think about ways to improve things. Those are valuable users who shouldn't be dissuaded from sharing their ideas.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (3 children)

    Speaking of that 1 in 100... PM tonight... Dude had a comment removed for referencing a "final solution", another mod banned them, I get this:

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    I don't know what you're trying to say here. That people suck on the internet? You do get that we're all in this cursed place together, right?

    I'm not gonna pull a "eat because starving kids in Africa" because folks who threaten to burn down someone's house are a bad time for everyone, but I've been getting rape threats since I was on the internet. You get shit for being a mod, half the population gets shit for being women. We all get shit for some reason or another.

    That person sucks and that situation sucks but you don't have my sympathy for it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    You seem to bring this up every time someone asks about this. It doesn't have to be an endless cycle of whining. It is not difficult to establish some kind of community-curated list of legitimate journalistic substacks that have bona fide journalistic teams and mastheads. It might actually be less work for you to do that instead of having to copy paste the same canned infantilizing response every other week.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -4 points 10 months ago

    It's already an endless cycle of whining. 😉 What I'm saying is we drew the line. As soon as we open that door to "some Substacks but not others" it will be an endless drama of "You're biased!" and "You're a Zionist!" and "Well you're a Nazi!"

    No, just... NO. The only fair way to do it is what we've done. No blogs. If you want a community full of crappy blogposts, youtube videos, and low effort shitposting, nothing is stopping anyone from creating one.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 10 months ago

    Of course. He's jordanlund.

  • source
  • [+] 16 points 10 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 16 points 10 months ago (4 children)

    Substack is not a CMS, it's a platform like Blogger or Medium. I pretty easily found other articles on the same story from places that don't host Nazis.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] [S] 7 points 10 months ago* (2 children)

    Fair point. I'd use the same arguments about web building platforms, though. Al Jazeera uses WordPress.com, the web building platform not the software. Jordanlund has removed sites for being hosted by WordPress before IIRC.

    (IMO Substack might unfortunately be the lesser evil: Medium doesn't compensate writers nearly as much, Blogger is owned by Google, and WordPress.com is pricier and waging an ego contest under Matt Mullenweg.)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    Jordanlund has removed sites for being hosted by WordPress before IIRC.

    Do you have any examples of this?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -1 points 10 months ago

    IIRC I have removed Wordpress links but not because they are Wordpress. There have been other removable issues with them. I can't think of a specific example.

    One rule in !world !world@lemmy.world that is squishier than I would like is:

    "Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed."

    I lean heavily on "MAY", it's not that opinion articles are 100% removed, they MAY be removed. Mods discretion.

    I get a lot of reports of "Opinion", I look at it and go "Yeah, but that's a salient point" and leave it alone.

    If the 'opinion' is "Ukrainians are Nazis" or "The Uyghur genocide is not a genocide" that shit is going to get removed with a quickness.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 10 months ago

    Correct, and as noted in rule 1, there are MULTIPLE platforms that are not allowed in !world !world@lemmy.world besides substack, notably Facebook, Youtube, Xitter, etc.

    Someone could post a CNN link on Facebook and it would get removed too, but for some reason people get really butthurt over Substack.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 10 months ago

    I agree.

    The policies of some news coms are part of the reason I just started my own. I'm a strong believer in media pluralism, which includes seeing the value in a wide variety of news sources. How something looks or where it's published has little to do with the quality of the journalism.

    Lawfare is on substack. Unicorn riot looks trashy as hell, but they're used as a first source by fact checkers and do high quality investigations. The Klaxon looks like a blog site run by one guy, but that guy is a professional journalist who performs well-sourced in-depth investigations.

    However, those are the rules of the community and they've given no inclination about changing them. Better to find or create a better com.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    This is a technical YDI with a heaping side of CLM(s). The comm rules spell out that Substack is verboten, even though the rule itself is misguided. Expect any such posts to be removed, most likely by the mod in question, until such point that either the rule or the modlist changes.

    The continued presence of such a technicality in the rules degrades the credibility of the comm as a whole.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 2 points 10 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] [S] 6 points 10 months ago* (3 children)

    i’ve never seen a meta thread in that commag. i suspect that Jordanl enforces the “post news articles only” rule quite well. here’s where it’s been discussed:

    https://programming.dev/comment/15884017

    https://lemmy.world/comment/14172977

    Jordanl simply repeats the same argument about X and disengages when people ask him to respond to the well-known refutation

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 10 months ago (3 children)
  • [+] 3 points 10 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 0 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    No, the community doesn't set the rules.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 5 points 10 months ago* (1 child)
  • [–] 0 points 10 months ago

    They are welcome to PM me or the others on the Mod team, the mods have a discord channel where we can discuss such things amongst ourselves.

    Usually it's more along the lines of "So and so got banned, they promise to do better if we un-ban them, how about it?" that kind of thing.

    But self posts and meta posts aren't allowed.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] -3 points 10 months ago

    I'm abrasive in PTB because the audience here a) is biased as fuck and b) are generally bad actors complaining about not being treated like special snowflakes.

    The complaint here is a great example. "You're being mean!"

    Well, read rule 1 before you post:

    "Blogsites are treated in the same manner as social media sites. Medium, Blogger, Substack, etc. are not valid news links regardless of who is posting them. Yes, legitimate news sites use Blogging platforms, they also use Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube and we don’t allow those links either."

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 5 points 10 months ago
    [–] -2 points 10 months ago

    Read the rules for !world@lemmy.world :

    "Rule 1:

    Blogsites are treated in the same manner as social media sites. Medium, Blogger, Substack, etc. are not valid news links regardless of who is posting them. Yes, legitimate news sites use Blogging platforms, they also use Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube and we don’t allow those links either."

  • source