This was in Lemmy world politics.

  • spujb@lemmy.cafeEnglish
    70·
    6 days ago

    finally a space to diss on jordanlund bless 😭

    i was banned by this mod for politely noting how certain comments lead to escalation of inappropriate behavior. i noted how by bantering with infringing accounts after comment removal, !world@lemmy.world mods actually increased the work they needed to do to remove abusive content and amplified toxic voices as a whole. i used no unkind language and really at the time i genuinely hoped for improvement to the quality of the community.

    their response?

    • permabanned
    • for “mod abuse”
    • one month after i made the post in question

    don’t use !world@lemmy.world. their entire mod team is dedicated to just kind of fucking around in a sandbox with thousands of users, not to creating a space for genuine constructive world news engagement. preferably also just stop using lemmy.world when possible.

  • Clbull@lemmy.world
    16·
    5 days ago

    There are three things that are certain in life: death, taxes and internet moderators being power tripping cucks.

  • Draconic NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    100·
    7 days ago

    Power tripping bastard for sure, banning someone for misspelling words? If anything that makes him look like a troll, not the OP.

    • insomniac_lemon@lemmy.cafeEnglish
      27·
      7 days ago

      I swear I’ve seen this same situation some time ago including with the exact misspelling. Could be a coincidence, though.

      EDIT: searching misspelling banned gives a comment by OP from 23 days ago (but the post is gone). I’m assuming what I remember seeing was probably this post before it was deleted and reposted.

  • Turbonics@lemmy.sdf.org
    43·
    6 days ago

    Lemmy.World mods are extremely Zionist and frequently ban users for saying anything remotely pro Palestinian or making a claim about Israel without evidence.

    Saying 20.000 killed Palestinians were Hamas without evidence to justify the genocide however, is totally fine.

    A very open Zionist “gedeliyah” got promoted to mod on their news community.

  • AresUII@lemmy.world
    72·
    7 days ago

    Because it’s clearly normal for your typography and patience to improve when you’re pissed off

  • laverabe@lemmy.worldEnglish
    18·
    5 days ago

    It’s a systematic problem. The large LW communities have a stranglehold that prevents new ones from taking hold.

    For Lemmy to improve, there needs to be a very easy way to find new communities, particularly on different instances!

    Currently there is no way to navigate communities on other instances without a direct keyword search, or by opening a private window to get the link directly from the other server as a logged off user. Clicking the ‘Communities’ link also needs to default to rising new communities, and not to existing communities.

    There also needs to be a major change to the hot/active sorting algorithm to favor small communities with higher engagement % over large ones with higher net upvotes (lower engagement %). The top ten communities should be changing from month to month - otherwise large communities will only get further entrenched and moderation will only get worse.

    This is a change that the devs would have to implement. Otherwise dbzer0 or lemmyzip or whatever other server that grows next will just eventually turn into LW and the same problem will repeat.

    Does anyone know if these ideas have already been discussed in a closed pull request?

      • borari@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        30·
        6 days ago

        “Against me? No. The differentiator I experience is because I’m male. I’ve had a lot of anti-male sentiment. I lost a job because of it. Because somebody didn’t like having talking to a guy. Such is life.”

        This is some borderline incel bullshit here.

        • Notyou@sopuli.xyz
          15·
          6 days ago

          I’m sure there is nothing else to the ‘I lost my job because somebody didn’t like having to talk to a guy’ thing either.

          • borari@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            17·
            6 days ago

            That’s kind of what I meant by the incel thing. To be it reads like “I was talking to coworkers in a terribly sexist and misogynistic manner and I got fired. That’s how a TOP 1% MAN speaks, so obviously I got fired because someone doesn’t like having to talk to a man, not because I’m a piece of shit with no self-awareness.”

            The whole bit about sympathizing with the BLM protesters but wishing they would protest in places where cops have actually shot people instead of in his city because it inconvenienced him screams that he’s unaware of both his privilege and his power, which only reinforces the whole lack of self-awareness thing.

      • JokeDeity@lemm.ee
        14·
        6 days ago

        LMFAO, a picture really is worth a million words. How does he look EXACTLY like you’d imagine a permanently online troll would?

        • catloaf@lemm.eeEnglish
          4·
          5 days ago

          I’m having trouble believing an article titled “White Progressive Discovers Portland’s Unwanted Reputation” isn’t satire.

        • goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org
          4·
          6 days ago

          So their profile picture used to be a picture similar to that. And now theirs is a picture of I voted in Oregon…

    • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
      30·
      6 days ago

      Wait, what? FlyingSquid seems fine. In the only drama I saw involving them, it seemed to me like they were in the right. I asked someone who was all heated up about what a POS they were for some details or examples, and literally all they could come up with was a single un-called for message FlyingSquid sent to one user months ago, which for a full-time moderator means they’re way ahead of the curve.

      Edit: Maybe I should ask for examples, what did FlyingSquid do?

      • PugJesus@lemmy.worldEnglish
        39·
        6 days ago

        FlyingSquid has a tendency to threaten moderator action in response to arguments they’re heavily involved in, which often comes off as a last-ditch effort to ‘win’.

        • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
          16·
          6 days ago

          Well, that’s not ideal. Have they actually taken action on it, though? If it’s just getting heated in an argument, that definitely seems not as bad as handing out bans for misspelling “Palestinian” or talking about jury nullification.

            • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
              20·
              6 days ago

              You’re talking about the exchange featuring your statements “The victim gave consent (as far as a 12-year old can do that of course). She in fact started self-harming because he got convicted and still does not regret or feel bad about the encounter.” and “According to the case notes, the attraction was mutual. He did not have to coerce her, by her own statements. It’s why he wasn’t convicted of grooming. Seriously, do at least a modicum of research.” Right? That’s the only time I see that anyone moderated you. Also, it wasn’t FlyingSquid that gave you that ban. They were just arguing with you, and then I think someone else banned you for your statements.

              Here’s what Wikipedia says about Steven van de Velde:

              He was convicted of child rape in 2016; in 2014, when Van de Velde was 19, he raped a 12-year-old British girl, after contacting her on social media, travelling to Britain to meet her, and giving her alcohol.

              This is, to me, yet another example of FlyingSquid doing absolutely nothing wrong, and then people spreading rumors about how they’re terrible.

              • 𝙲𝚑𝚊𝚒𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚗 𝙼𝚎𝚘𝚠@programming.dev
                4·
                6 days ago

                Hmm, I must have misread the modlog then. I thought I swore I got a message from them stating I was banned.

                Just to clarify (without getting into it any further), that guy was convicted for rape (never disputed that) but explicitly cleared of the grooming charge, because there was nothing in their exchanged messages that suggested grooming at all. The broader argument was that this guy is definitely a total fucking idiot who should have known so much better, but he didn’t have the characteristics of some precalculating serial child rapist or something. The case details is also why he was convicted of a lesser charge in the Netherlands. He took all the necessary steps (therapy, avoiding solo contact with kids despite being cleared by therapists, etc…) to avoid this from happening again. I challenged his “irredeemability” that was present in that thread, which is a very accepted view in the Netherlands but not so abroad. Possibly because whilst Dutch sources have a lot of the details of the case, the English sources are much less in-depth.

                I don’t really have any other grievances against FS btw. They can be a bit headstrong and combative at times, but I don’t know much else about them.

                • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
                  8·
                  6 days ago

                  For what it’s worth, I don’t think you should receive a temp ban for those statements. I think you are wrong, but I don’t think we need to remove every wrong statement from the comments to keep them as “correct” comments only. I think people can say things, and we can just all talk to each other, and it’s okay. There are some things that I think should be banned from the comments: Misrepresenting why you are saying what you’re saying, or deliberately egging on a confrontation, or using multiple accounts to create a false consensus. But almost any real individual who’s just saying what they think and why, I think is okay.

                  The point that I’m making about FlyingSquid is that the way you told the story was that you argued with them, you were right and they were wrong and you demonstrated that with evidence, and then they banned you. Then, looking into the facts, nothing remotely similar to that happened in any respect. That’s the pattern I’ve consistently seen about people who are critical of FlyingSquid’s moderation. I don’t know why that is, although I have a theory that because they are generally on point about moderating certain types of toxic individuals, there’s a whisper campaign by certain toxic individuals trying to paint them as some particular type of bad moderator even if the facts don’t support it.

                  It’s not even all that hard to misconstrue some event that happened into some huge malicious deal that it isn’t, as you just discovered.

          • Cephalotrocity@biglemmowski.winEnglish
            9·
            6 days ago

            Have they actually taken action on it, though?

            Yes, absolutely. If you support all your claims with good sources, maintain a civil demeanour, and clearly hold the superior argument he will go through your entire history to find something, anything, to justify action no matter how irrelevant or ancient the reason.

              • Cephalotrocity@biglemmowski.winEnglish
                6·
                6 days ago

                If you’re that interested just go through his comment history. He’s not shy about doing the same in his comments. Usually it is just a thinly veiled threat.

                Edit: Found a good example

                • lad@programming.devEnglish
                  5·
                  5 days ago

                  What you’re saying sounds to me a bit like one can break community rules if mods won’t notice right away. If community rules were broken, I don’t think it matters much if it happened right now or earlier. Besides, I would also expect that someone breaking the rules will not argue in good faith.

                  So, to me this example doesn’t prove what you imply.

                • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
                  7·
                  6 days ago

                  That’s not really handing out a ban, though. That was my question on “taking action” about it. Talking in comments is different.

                  I’m curious to see if this is in response to him “losing” the argument, or if it’s in response to someone being personally hostile to him, and him pointing out that if they’re doing that to other people they may get moderated for it. Most of what I’ve been seeing that is summarized as the first thing is actually the second thing.

          • Draconic NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            7·
            6 days ago

            I’m not sure if they actually have. I know they’ve publicly called people out for reports which isn’t great, and have made threats based on reporting content multiple times, something that isn’t possible in lemmy, the content in question at the time was spam.

            • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
              10·
              6 days ago

              Yeah, that’s the one un-called for message I talked about. It’s not ideal but everyone swears there are all these examples of FlyingSquid doing much worse, and then if I ask for examples, it’s either that one message, backpedaling from the earlier claims, or else it’s something that when I look at it is a wild mischaracterization of something perfectly reasonable.

      • Deceptichum@quokk.auEnglish
        21·
        6 days ago

        I’ve seen FS straight up lie when banning people, making up excuses etc. For a period they even followed me around commenting on nearly everything I did trying to harass me until I called him out and the “coincidental” replies magically stopped.

        FS is worse than JL from every interaction I’ve had with eirher. JL I can see having a bit of common sense and maturity.

          • _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
            6·
            6 days ago

            I don’t know why you’re so invested in trying to whitewash FS, but what makes you think you trying to discredit the many experiences with others is going to change anyone’s mind about the worst mod on Lemmy? Your opinion on the experiences of others doesn’t mean shit.

          • Deceptichum@quokk.auEnglish
            2·
            6 days ago

            Not without spending time digging through his post history. Which after working so many 12 hour days this week I am in no mood to do.

            I’m not here to make people take my side, this is simply my opinion of him based on my year of interactions.

            • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
              5·
              5 days ago

              Fair enough. I think I can just search for the following you around behavior you described, and take a look at it and see how it seems to me.

              Not that I’m doubting you necessarily, but there is some pretty wild revisionist history in these comments, all of it not matching the evidence on examination and all of it pointing to exactly the same conclusion, which is pretty weird. So I’d like to look for myself.

      • WhyFlip@lemmy.world
        11·
        6 days ago

        Guy never admits he’s wrong, ever. And I love the fact that he’s married with a kid and seems to be online 24/7.

        • refalo@programming.dev
          4·
          6 days ago

          And they’re arguably wrong a LOT. Not only that but everything is always black and white with them, there is no grey area or different perspectives possible.

          As a rule, strong feelings about issues do not emerge from deep understanding.

        • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
          3·
          6 days ago

          Yeah. I haven’t seen FS abuse his power, but man he will just be clearly in the wrong side of an argument and refuse to admit it. Not somebody I enjoy having a debate with, but he keeps his personal disagreements separate from his mod role, and I respect that.

        • catloaf@lemm.eeEnglish
          1·
          5 days ago

          I think he’s partially disabled or something, which is how he has so much free time. I feel like he’s said something like that, or that he has some kind of chronic condition.

          Which is no excuse for having shit netizen behavior.

      • finderscult@lemmy.mlEnglish
        13·
        6 days ago

        They argue with users and ban them if they feel they’ve lost the discussion. They’re also incredibly quick to ban for “trolling” like a lot of le epik reddit mods turned .world superusers.

        • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
          4·
          6 days ago

          They argue with users and ban them if they feel they’ve lost the discussion.

          Can you give an example? Someone else tried to claim this just now, and when I looked into it, the claim was laughably false.

        • Iceblade@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          12·
          6 days ago

          From what I’ve seen FlyingSquid tends to be quite fair when moderating, doesn’t abuse the mod tools and is quite respectful and civil outside of the mod role. On occasion I’ve had disagreements and civil arguments with squid, and not once has the hammer been used as a conversation-ending argument.

          Jordan however…

          • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
            10·
            6 days ago

            I’ve asked people over and over for a single example of FlyingSquid doing this. Only one person has responded, and that was with an “example” where neither the argument with FlyingSquid nor FlyingSquid being the one that banned them was truthful. This is one of the reasons I think this is a deliberate attempt to start destructive rumors about him.

            Edit: Someone else has now given an example. They had said that someone was, among other things, a “fucking shitwit,” “self righteous piece of subhuman filth,” “a fucking idiot,” “fucking brain dead,” “your argument is stupid and you deserve what the republicans are gonna do to you,” and that they “hope it’s painful and prolonged.” Then they got a three day ban, and then said the ban was a way for FlyingSquid to wield his mod powers to “win” the argument against their clearly superior position.

        • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
          6·
          6 days ago

          There’s a firmly held belief by a certain segment of the community that everyone on Lemmy is liberals who will ban you if you are anti-genocide. Everyone on Lemmy is anti-genocide. Complaining that it’s full of these liberals and pro-genocide people is just a way to do some aggrieved whining whenever someone is disagreeing with some total nonsense. “We need to hate on Biden because genocide” “Yes but Trump is ten times worse” “Oh I see, you’re one of those pro-genocide people trying to censor me” is roughly how it goes.

          • _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
            11·
            6 days ago

            Everyone on Lemmy is anti-genocide.

            I’m gonna quote that, just because it’s so fucking stupid and I think it needs emphasis to show how disconnected you obviously are.

            • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
              4·
              6 days ago

              Maybe I should have said “99%”, I have seen some overtly pro-Israel users. They’re pretty few and far between, though. The vast majority of the time, it’s someone using a lazy strawman to attack someone by pretending they like genocide, instead of dealing directly with what they’re saying.

              Can you link me to some examples of defense of genocide? I can pretty much guarantee you that whatever example you send me is not going to be a defense of genocide, it’s just going to be some opinion you disagree with which you are pretending implies support for genocide, so you don’t have to engage with what it actually says.

              • _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
                7·
                6 days ago

                No, what you can promise me is that you’ll attempt to rationalize it as something it’s not, the same way you’re going to great lengths to try to whitewash FlyingSquid. The problem with that is, you’re just some random idiot on Lemmy, and I don’t care if you’re delusional or not, so I don’t see why I should take that kind of time debating you. I don’t care if you agree with me or not, so there’s no benefit in it for me whatsoever.

                • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
                  7·
                  6 days ago

                  You messaged me, man. There wasn’t benefit for you in typing up your opinion in the first place, either. If you’re willing to spend time yelling about how it is, but not willing to demonstrate how it actually is when asked questions about it, then I’m going to draw the obvious conclusion.

            • 𝕽𝖚𝖆𝖎𝖉𝖍𝖗𝖎𝖌𝖍@midwest.social
              1·
              6 days ago

              Most people are anti-genocide. I think many people do not agree on what genocide is. There’s a large segment of people who believe Israel is in a perpetual existential crisis, surrounded by countries full of people who think Israel shouldn’t exist and that pretty much goes for Jews in general; and that Israel is merely defending itself. Personally, while I do agree that Israel is surrounded by a lot of people who don’t think it should exist, I also believe this does not justify their (collective) behaviors: the settlements, and the genocide in Palestinian.

              So the person you replied to was, I think, saying that most people oppose Genocide, many disagree on whether what Israel is doing is genocide, and a few would like to see some ethnic and/or cultural groups entirely eradicated. I agree with GP that the last group is relatively small.

    • leftytighty@slrpnk.netEnglish
      14·
      6 days ago

      In my experience FlyingSquid tends to participate in the stupid and toxic aspects of the communities he’s policing but doesn’t stoop to abusing the power, certainly not to the extent of others I’ve seen. i.e. I think he could do more positive actions to build a good community but he doesn’t use as many negative actions to actively harm the community.

      Lemmy.world is kinda lame in general though, especially when it comes to politics. Very narrow minded and like a bunch of piranhas when it comes to suppressing dissent. If you are easing into lemmy from Reddit you’ll feel right at home there.

  • answersplease77@lemmy.world
    29·
    6 days ago

    wtf is it with lemmy world mods. you think this is reddit? do you want your instance to be an echo champer or want users to just leave and join another?

  • lath@lemmy.world
    35·
    6 days ago

    I feel the separation between staff and user has already been entrenched.

    Looking at modlogs, at times the given reasons show to me at least that they, the mods, have grown tired and are now settling on getting rid of potential trouble rather than fixing it.

    Experienced can also mean jaded and in that state of mind you no longer care about circumstances, you just want to get shit done so you’ll be rid of another stress you don’t want to deal with.

    Mods also need a timeout. The volunteer excuse can only work for so long. A way has to be found to prevent them from feeling like they’re in a deadend job where they’re only greeted with hostility. We need a mod relaxation and decompression program.

    • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.worldEnglish
      15·
      6 days ago

      Moderation is like politics, and inherently attracts the most narcissistic and authoritarian, so it must be decentralized. As in users have to mod 1 comment/post for every n number of comments/posts they post &/or read after they’ve been active n number of months, but it would need to be done by averaging moderation across a random sample of users; preferencing users who are least bias and more trusted over time (but without growing dependent on them or their own safe spaces). I’d be happy to mod if it were an occasional part of participation, but I don’t want to mod everything, or it to be expected of me when I’m busy with life, or to do it permanently.

      FYI Lemmy will ultimately fail because the lead dev is a pathetic despot tankie manchild, as bad as the worst mods on reddit. He created Lemmy to admin ml as his own safe space. He will never give up the power it’s given him. It will need to be forked to solve the core problems.

      • Optional@lemmy.world
        9·
        6 days ago

        FYI Lemmy will ultimately fail because the lead dev is a pathetic despot tankie manchild, as bad as the worst mods on reddit.

        Fork it and move on.

      • Blaze (he/him)@feddit.orgEnglish
        1·
        6 days ago

        As in users have to mod 1 comment/post for every n number of comments/posts they post &/or read after they’ve been active n number of months, but it would need to be done by averaging moderation across a random sample of users; preferencing users who are least bias and more trusted over time (but without growing dependent on them or their own safe spaces)

        Nice idea. Mods are hard to find indeed, and this system could help

  • kingthrillgore@lemmy.ml
    11·
    3 days ago

    I was recently site wide banned for 30 days for something I said on LW so I blocked the entire instance. I wish this was just an LW issue but it feels like I have to walk carefully around glass. Ultimately what I said was wrong, but it’s not a good look.