I haven't witnessed any direct brigading, but I can always tell when a post or comment is from them. I like seeing radically different ideas and opinions on occasion, but it would be a lot less irritating if they would drop the "it's not my job to educate you" stance. The majority of responses to elaboration are just name calling. Honestly, that whole aspect seems pretty antithetic to communism.

They are free to defederate from every instance where people are anti-AI, but they want to have their filter bubble and preach it too. Pretending to have only heard a set of straw man arguments and then laboriously deleting every comment that points out it's a straw man.

I was meaning the ML stuff, but yeah I know blue MAGA, but it's not just that blue MAGA are just dumb liberals, but blue MAGA is specifically the policy of Democrats to create a Bill Clinton 2.0 that adopts most meaningful policies of Trump (the anti trans and imperialist fascist policies like supporting slaughtering of foreign born brown people, criminalizing transness inherently, the increase in surveillance and authoritarian policy like ID scans and using Palantir/Flock, being dark woke without being woke at all, so on so on) and pretends it's different because a Democrat is doing it. It's the classic "Democrats can do Republican policy better" stupidity.

I think generally horseshoe theory is silly, but there is too much authoritarianism that leads into missing the point of your goals, it's why I can't stand any version of ML but Cuba, as generally they do have elections and people there are vocally active and they LGBT rights, (while making the best out of their little resources!!!) while China on the other hand has given up on communism and became a capitalist country basically, Russia literally is a "liberal (formerly) 'democracy,'" North Korea is a fiefdom owned by a guy obsessed about power and Macs, and other such failures. I think any ML that wants to be taken seriously and not be seen as a drooling bootlicker of the USSR needs to at least accept that the system they push can fail easily in its goals due to its authoritarianism.

As is pretending to not understand the Nazi bar analogy.

Yeah, their flags are totally different.

You literally call them "red fash"😭🙏

'ol Puggy banned you for calling out his bad faith while using evidence that contradicts him. Surely he hasn't done that before, and won't again.

A majority of a specific in-group voted for that rule at some point in the past? Oh wow, I'm sorry, there's no way that can be unjust.

What's telling is that the comments defending AI stay up, saying how they've never seen good arguments while banning good arguments without explanation.

But sure, it's no skin off my back. I'll block your communities and your admins and mods and advise your users to migrate. Try to learn something from this when your community implodes in a couple years.

But that doesn't make much sense.

Did the majority of the instance vote for this rule, or was it only the people who actually showed up to vote? Because if it's the latter, then it's not very representative, is it? Wouldn't the fact that many comments criticising the use of GenAI, which directly inflates AI and tech companies and the worst that capitalism has to offer, being removed show that it's not a clear majority, and you should revote?

And even when, why would anarchists vote when you've shown yourself to be draconian? When you remove and ban random users for random reasons. Isn't one of anarchists core beliefs that voting means implicit agreement with the state? With you being the state in this example.