Or even if they had an instance-wide rule saying “don’t criticise Russia or China here”. It’s fine as long as the rules are clear.
But no, instead they libel the users criticising either, claiming that they violated rule #1 (TL;DR “no bigots”). Even when the criticism is clearly against the government.
And then you get a bunch of 11yos eating that ban message for breakfast, because they’re full of gullibleness and don’t get the purpose of this utterance dumb fucks.
It isn’t a high mark, I agree. But while the “kill you are self lol.” thing could be just an admin in a really shitty day, this lack of transparency is consistent behaviour.
I get what you are saying: shittiness that happens daily is a more consistent pattern than something that happens ONCE.
On the other hand, an admin telling someone to literally kill themselves is such an extreme event that it might be grounds for their removal as an admin?
It’s an age-old philosophy problem: which is worse, stealing daily vs. actually killing someone once?
Or is that a trick question, since both are kinda shitty, no?
In any case, what happens when someone does BOTH of them?
The answer is ofc literally nothing, when said person is protected by the instance admins who are also the developers of this codebase. I wonder what would have happened though if Huffman was caught saying something similar to the users of Reddit? Yeah, nothing, that’s right - it’s not like we would leave Reddit or anything:-P. (Except I did, and now I’ve left Lemmy too, hello from PieFed!:-D)
Yup, they are both shitty, and grounds to remove an admin.
However when it’s a single event there’s still the chance that it won’t happen again, as the admin could regret it. There’s still grounds for “this won’t affect me, as a user, in the future”.
And when it’s both, as you said, it gets even worse.
Or even if they had an instance-wide rule saying “don’t criticise Russia or China here”. It’s fine as long as the rules are clear.
But no, instead they libel the users criticising either, claiming that they violated rule #1 (TL;DR “no bigots”). Even when the criticism is clearly against the government.
And then you get a bunch of 11yos eating that ban message for breakfast, because they’re
full of gullibleness and don’t get the purpose of this utterancedumb fucks.Tbf, that admin telling someone to kill themselves wasn’t exactly a high mark for their ethics imho.
It isn’t a high mark, I agree. But while the “kill you are self lol.” thing could be just an admin in a really shitty day, this lack of transparency is consistent behaviour.
I get what you are saying: shittiness that happens daily is a more consistent pattern than something that happens ONCE.
On the other hand, an admin telling someone to literally kill themselves is such an extreme event that it might be grounds for their removal as an admin?
It’s an age-old philosophy problem: which is worse, stealing daily vs. actually killing someone once?
Or is that a trick question, since both are kinda shitty, no?
In any case, what happens when someone does BOTH of them?
The answer is ofc literally nothing, when said person is protected by the instance admins who are also the developers of this codebase. I wonder what would have happened though if Huffman was caught saying something similar to the users of Reddit? Yeah, nothing, that’s right - it’s not like we would leave Reddit or anything:-P. (Except I did, and now I’ve left Lemmy too, hello from PieFed!:-D)
Yup, they are both shitty, and grounds to remove an admin.
However when it’s a single event there’s still the chance that it won’t happen again, as the admin could regret it. There’s still grounds for “this won’t affect me, as a user, in the future”.
And when it’s both, as you said, it gets even worse.
That rule becomes clear very quickly when you’re familiar with Lemmy. (Unless you’re defederated from .ml.)
It is not enough; it should be explicit. Users should be able to know the rules of an instance before they even interact with it.