you’re saying that we should overlook the actions of the first kind of anti-semite, by claiming that in us doing otherwise would weaken efforts against the second kind of anti-semite
No, i'm not saying that. I described what I saw and what I roughly concluded. What you're ascribing to me is far beyond my current considerations.
You are expected to provide some proof of your claims
Are we on Wikipedia or in the court, perhaps? No, this is just a forum. You only had to ask and I would post the screenshots. It is quite obvious why I didn't post them initially (if the thread was still up I'd have linked it) - they're large and would probably detract from the point, like I'm still arguing with the guy from .ml instead of talking about a somewhat different matter here.
It is clear you don’t have a very full or complete picture of the Feddit situation
I've read the OP text and some of the comments. So you're effectively agreeing that all of this still doesn't provide a very full picture. Apparently I had to interact with Feddit users elsewhere enough to come to your conclusions. But I didn't, so the reasonable thing to do for me for now is to stay by my vote "against", because I can't make conclusions based on things I don't know about.
I said what I saw and how I made my conclusions based on that. I asked you for your definition of zionism, to try to figure out what exactly is the problem with the screenshot you posted and to understand your viewpoint better in general, but you haven't provided it yet. It seems you're expecting me to read minds and/or spontaneously agree with you even while you're insulting me. I can't do that.
If you think Feddit being critical of real antisemitism means they have a point when dismissing anti-Zionists as antisemitic bigots, you will again find very little agreement here.
And that's reasonable, those are two different things indeed, and I hope I haven't conflated them.
So OP posted a dozen examples, and you think they're not sufficient by themselves, and instead have to bring up an another screenshot? That's just solidifying my point.
What definition of zionism do you work with?
What is "whataboutism" here anyway? I'm talking about how people perceive and judge feddit users' comments, which has veered into blanket dismissal of their comments even when objectively justified. That's why I brought up the situation.
Edit: No links, screenshots, or modlog info on the subject at hand. For all we know this story about a fascist ml user could be made up to apologize for Feddit. Fuck off dude.
Well fuck you too, asshole, have you considered asking me for the links and screenshots before telling me to fuck off? I didn't post them originally because they weren't crucial to my observations. Aren't my own comments still visible on my profile, couldn't you just check there? There will be nothing in the modlog because the user deleted the thread themselves. But here are the screenshots of my own replies and two replies that I still have in my notifications, as the rest is now unavailable:
The OP posted a screenshot of the fascist antisemitic tweet that was also posted to 4chan's /pol/ with a similar caption, you can see it there in the archive that I linked. The title of the Lemmy thread was "Every time".
Just yesterday I had an odd interaction with an .ml user who reposted a straight-up nazi tweet, by a nazi profile, even with their own thread title resembling a frequent nazi dogwhistle. Several non-.ml users, apparently mostly from feddit, pointed out the post looks like it was posted by a nazi. .ml users responded in part by attacking their instance allegiance (calling them "whingy fedditers"). Since I posted enough clear evidence of the Twitter profile being a fascist, OP commendably deleted their thread.
What I saw there is feddit users being met with a hate boner from .ml and their correct suspicions of a tweet that looks antisemitic indeed being antisemitic being ignored and made light of.
That's my personal experience with feddit and its zionism, and consequently I've ended up suspicious of some of Lemmy users' standards regarding this whole matter.
The examples of feddit moderation posted here in OP are almost entirely sanctions against grave personal attacks. I am completely unconvinced that this is proof of the moderators' zionist positions. "Fuck you, you piece of trash" and "fuck you and your whole family" is not "a few hard truths". I'm also unsure if I get the context right, is mrdown a Palestinian? Many of those comments break the most elementary civility standards and verge into murderous fantasies.
Calling for the destruction of Israel must obviously mean you want to kill every last man, woman and child, rather than simply wanting to overthrow Netanyahu’s genocidal fascist regime.
Then say it like that? No, destroying a country is not the same as overthrowing its regime, those are different things. I support the latter with regards to Israel, but would hardly dare say the former.
This post was supposed to convince me feddit's behaviour is problematic. I come away with the opposite impression. So, I vote against the bans.
That whole website is incredible.
Netflix's deed
his publisher told him the descriptions of same-sex behavior in a book on animal sexual behavior were against the law
So it wasn't legally or expressedly banned by the govt. But in authoritarian fear-based and legally unpredictable states it's not unusual for people to individually take rules even further than technically necessary, to affirm their adherence to the system and to be safe from even the smallest suspicion or most ridiculous accusation.
Might be worth noting that the publisher (Eksmo-AST) is one of the biggest book publishers in Russia.
I'm not saying you should read them; and I already provided the reasons for reading them above. You can find those reasons compelling or not.
I never mentioned the reviewer being paid. There's many interesting blogs and Goodreads profiles that are worth following too. My impression is, you're drawing an overly sharp boundary between your style of reading and something you imagine is "professional" reading of those who care about reviews.
Analysis and discussion of literary works is only for those "inside" the literary world? But surely everyone who reads is inside the literary world.
It is reasonable to read a book and be interested in other people's different thoughts on it, that hardly requires some sort of specialist knowledge.
That's why I put the quotation marks ;)
Pterosauria is a branch of archosauria, together with dinos and crocodiles. Idk about those in the sea.
Two pterosauri ("fyling dinosaurs"), plesiosaurus, dimetrodon, and I don't know the name of that other swimming dino, maybe mosasaurus.
(the painting is: Adoration of the Kings, by Rogier van der Weyden)
