Alt text: a screenshot of a microblog post with the text “you walking down an alleyway with a gram of weed in your pocket, who would you rather catch you?” Below are two pictures side by side. One of Kamala Harris and the other of Batman.

  • seathru@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
    1·
    2 months ago

    Honestly don’t think either one would give 2 shits about a gram of weed.

    Also batman’s a billionaire. That’s worse than being a cop.

    Edit: LOL are you just banning anyone that finds your meme shitty? Fragile.

      • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
        0·
        2 months ago

        Okay, I call shenanigans.

        Some of those comments are still visible, and I find your claim that they violated C/ rules a stretch at best.

        I would hope that you either clarify your rules so that it is much less likely to happen in the future, or that you reevaluate the decisions.

        The worst of the ones still visible to me would require a great deal of hypersensitivity and a nigh maniacal definition of any of the rules as they existed when I just went to look at them. Now, removing those comments, that would make sense. Warning the people that made them, makes total sense, but it would be better to build up the listing of the rules to include some examples, or you’d end up warning more people over time doing it piecemeal like that.

        But bans? I hate to break it to you, but I used to be known for being a harsh mod I’m some ways, and none of those comments merit bans with the rules as they’re currently written.

        But, hey, it’s your C/, do what you want. If you want to exclude any and all dissent, that’s your choice. Just don’t be surprised when the C/ ends up as an echo chamber with little to no activity.

        • Wet Noodle@sopuli.xyz
          1·
          2 months ago

          Yeah I was apparently supporting oppressive systems for stating a prosecutor can’t unilaterally change laws. Dudes on a trip

        • TwiddleTwaddle@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOPM
          01·
          2 months ago

          The community has been mostly dead for nearly a month due to a lack of moderation, but before I and the other new mod took over this /c it was very intentionally a space free of people defending electoral politics and pro-capitalist politicians. That requires very active and (in some views) harsh moderation. The new mod team have agreed to continue the tradition of the original head moderator. What you call an echo chamber, I call a safe space for nuanced discussion of leftist and post-leftist politics. There are plenty of other places on Lemmy and elsewhere that are friendly to liberals and other capitalists.

          I will not tolerate people accusing leftists of being Russian bots or assets in this community, and that’s what I handed out temp bans for. If the community thinks my actions were too harsh, they can be reversed.

          The wording of the community guidelines was changed a bit recently by the mod in charge before us, but after the original mod stepped down several weeks ago. Cassa and I have discussed reverting back to the wording of the old rules. We haven’t yet because we didn’t want to be seen as too eager to make changes. We will be considering making these slight changes because I agree with you - clearly spelled out rules will certainly reduce friction on moderation. Especially when moderation needs to be heavy handed.

  • Luccus@feddit.org
    0·
    2 months ago

    Oh, nooo, a democratic politician is not gonna bring on a literal liberalsocialist utopia?! That’s basically just like letting a literal faschist win! No difference at aaall!

    Ow!

    Why am I-ow!

    Please, Mr. Mod, sto-ow!

    Stop beating me with the anarcho-cop dild-ow!

    Why am I being ban-ow?

    is driven away in anarcho-mod-ist partolling vehicle

    • TwiddleTwaddle@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOPM
      01·
      2 months ago

      Notice yours and the other comments critical of me still up? I’m not banning anyone or even removing comments for being critical of me or this post.

      I’m removing comments supportive of the US so-called justice system or being uncivil and rude in a way not condusive to nuanced political discussion.

      I’ve temp-banned three accounts for calling me a Russian bot. That action my be too harsh for a first offence, and I’m open to discussion about that. However, that type of rhetoric has absolutely no place here.

      Discussion about the moderation of this community is absolutely allowed, and as long as it doesn’t degrade to throwing insults, it will all remain up.

      • Luccus@feddit.org
        0·
        2 months ago

        I’ve really thought about whether I even want to engage with this. Mostly because I see your comment as dishonest, misinformed or maybe just tone deaf; to voice the kindest interpretation I can muster, from what I have seen.

        Here’s the deal: The US is currently at a point where its already fragile and lackluster democracy could become completely meaningless within a matter of months.

        There’s a time to push for more. But not now. You banned people and deleted their comment for “electioneering”; for advocating for the best path forward currently available. You may not like the system or the dems, but there just isn’t any momentum for anything else. That has to be built up first.

        If you want to bitch and moan, feel free to do so after the immediate threat has been dealt with. Anything else is practically accelerationism and will lead to a terrible outcome and disenfranchise who knows how many people.

        Bargain with what you have and don’t overextend.

        EDIT: I’ll not engage with anything that doesn’t also offer a practical, actionable solution. Striving for the best is great, but look around you. Abolishing the police is not on the table, and not voting because of a single issue is shooting at ones own foot.

        EDIT #2: Words.

        • rothaine@beehaw.orgEnglish
          0·
          2 months ago

          a practical, actionable solution

          I’m starting to believe that there is a contingent on Lemmy who wants this solution to be violent revolution, but they don’t want to say that out loud. They don’t want you to vote Kamala, they don’t want you to vote Trump, they don’t want you to vote third-party–they want you to make some molotovs and buy a Guy Fawkes mask.

          But maybe I’m just reading into things.

          • bigboig@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            01·
            2 months ago

            Eh, I have the same hunch. They wanna be violent and be heroes, but vigilantes are mostly fantasy. In the meantime, they pat themselves on the back for playing pretend