This community has been locked, please see the discussion here. The original sidebar contents can be found below:
***
# Rules
1. Any drama must be posted as an observer, you cannot post drama that you are involved with.
2. When posting screenshots of drama, you must obscure the identity of all the participants.
3. The poster must have a credible post and comment history before submitting a piece of history. This is to avoid sock-puppetry and witch hunts.
The usual instance-wide rules also apply.
***
Chronicle the life and tale of the fediverse (+ matrix)
Largely a sublemmy about capturing drama, from fediverse spanning drama to just lemmy drama.
Includes lore like how a instance got it's name, how an instance got defederated, how an admin got doxxed, fedihistory etc
(New) This sub's intentions is to an archive/newspaper, as in preferably don't get into fights with each other or the ppl featured in the drama
Tags: fediverse news, lemmy news, lemmyverse
Partners:
* [midwest.social/c/Fediverse](https://midwest.social/c/fediverse)
* [Sub promo](https://lemmy.ca/c/communitypromo)
* [Fedizens](https://lemmy.ca/c/fedizens)
The original community icon is here
Its a shame because they're prominent voice on lemmy. Good on the admins for not tolerating this. I don't understand the point of targeting a person you don't like on the internet just because they said something that upset you and spamming their post with downvotes. If you don't like someone block their ass and be done with it. I agree with the perspective that its harassment (and an incredibly petty ineffective form of it at that)
Prominent is certainly a choice of words
I wouldnt be surprised if he was the source of the majority if mod reports the last few days - some time off would do him good.
Good on the admins for not tolerating this.
...
How many downvotes exactly are we talking about here?
Is it, like, two hundred? Or is it, like, ten?
I’ve never had a problem with that user either.
I love your username by the way.
Not only have I never had a problem with him, I've literally never seen him have a problem with anyone or vice versa.
I looked back in his modlog, and pretty much what I found was silliness. I've said before, I really think there are people on Lemmy trying to stir up absurd drama for reasons of their own to use to attack mods especially that they don't like and get others to bully them for being "wrong" in some kind of artificial way on some kind of various hot-button issue. This looks 100% like that.
Anyone who feels like this dude is wrong, go look at his modlog, make your own decision.
Not only have I never had a problem with him, I’ve literally never seen him have a problem with anyone or vice versa.
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/35965565?scrollToComments=true
drama-free of all possible Lemmy users
That's... not how I would describe the user.
They're banned from blahaj lemmy for repeated and ongoing gatekeeping and they've got a mile long modlog...
You shouldn’t judge a user by the length of their modlog.
Ada's idea of gatekeeping includes using "you" as a pronoun.
The other reply here, from the name I will not type, is by an instance-hopping / ban-evading spam goblin who posts right-wing propaganda and pretends he's just a curious lil leftist who thinks it's neat-o.
This whole thing is an ESH that may extend to everyone commenting, including me.
Specifically, he said (among other similar things):
There's an argument to be made for neopronouns in the following cases: - People who don't like 'They' as singular - People who believe there should be a neopronoun(s) that is not simply neutral/neuter, but explicitly for NB identities To the first, I will die on this grammatical hill, but I also acknowledge that it's a matter of taste. If you want to push for Xe/Xim or whichever as gender-neutral-singular, that's fine, and I'll respect your pronouns, but I really do think that 'they' is perfectly serviceable as-is and we should just expand usage of it. If the cultural zeitgeist goes against it, though, it's whatever, if Xe/Xim becomes the new norm, I'll swap to Xe/Xim. To the second, I understand the argument, but I find it non-intuitive. I'll respect the pronouns of people who want a dozen different new pronouns added to the lexicon, but I'll also vehemently argue against the practice. Pronouns are meant to streamline communication, and gendered language itself is something of a relict.
"Gatekeeping." Ban.
This whole thing is stupid. I don't even want to step into or bring up the other big relevant issue that caused strife because it's even stupider than that.
You guys are fuckin' with this guy because he did downvoting, and because he expressed what overall sounded to me like pretty reasonable opinions honestly.
People aren't hating on you here. It's fine. You don't have to turn everyone into an enemy.
am I misunderstanding the definition of gatekeeping? It sounds like he doesn't like neo-pronouns because the complicate language and he sees them as pointless but will still use them?
Is from when blajah was bending over backwards to defend drag?
Gatekeeping is when you don't think what I want you to, so I have to remove you from my community because you didn't think what I wanted you to (edit: means YOU were gatekeeping, obviously, in case somehow it wasn't clear)
Abuse is when you downvote people I say you can't downvote
Ban is okay though, for someone I say it's okay for. That's not abuse like downvotes are. Obviously.
Get with the program
/s
Drag is banned from blahaj. Gatekeeping people's identities and pronouns is still against the rules.
And if it was a single comment, you'd have a point, but it was ongoing, repeated and deliberate arguments in a space that had explicit rules against what he was doing, rules that he understood. And rather than following the rules, or posting in other communities, he brought it up over and over again, arguing that he has the right to decide other people's identities.
And when banned for it, he made sure to keep adding flames to the fire.
Whatever else he is, he is not drama free.
Over the freaking Drag troll issue. You'll forgive us if not everybody shares the same opinion of who's creating the drama in that particular case.
There's more than that https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/49571446/20253309
That seems unrelated to the Blahaj comment?
drama-free
That's not how I would describe the user
Yeah, I was mostly just referring to the bit about being banned from Blahaj. Shoulda made that clear
Even on that, he was involved in the 196 forced migration attempt
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/35965565?scrollToComments=true
Ah. I block most of the meme comms, so that pretty much passed me by entirely.
How did dbzer0 pick literally the most helpful and drama-free of all possible Lemmy users to ban? As far as I can tell, literally the only thing the dude does is post about cool stuff and chat. I didn't even know he was active as a moderator in any real capacity.
hmm now I'm curious
>checks
AHAHAHAHA no. Funny, but no. I have that dude blocked, I can't remember exactly why but I've had him blocked for at least a year and I remember his username and him being a twat, I just don't care enough to go looking up how he was a twat.
AHAHAHAHA no. Funny, but no.
Can I do that too? I mean, I have enough respect for the people reading my stuff to explain why I think things so they can think it over, see if it makes sense, I mean they're free to agree or disagree but I guess I was wasting my time with that when AHAHAHAHAHA means obviously I'm right and the other person is wrong...
I can't remember exactly why but I've had him blocked for at least a year and I remember his username and him being a twat
Okay. Who are you? Why do I take your opinion about him seriously just because you say it and actively refuse to give any reason?
You can have whatever opinion about the guy you want, I was just offering that I've had personal experience with someone you classify as "the most helpful and drama-free" being anything but, and if he got banned he probably deserved it. I'm very sorry I don't feel like digging through every comment I've/he's ever written to go and remember exactly why I think he's an obnoxious dickhead, all I can remember is that I've interacted with him, and he was enough of an obnoxious dickhead to justify blocking him. You're welcome to go do so if you don't believe me.
Yeah what was I thinking looking up his modlog, quoting some of the stuff that got him banned, and weighing in on it and specifically why. I should have just said I liked him, and "if he got banned, he probably didn't deserve it" all confident-like, and called it a day. It's easier, too.
no, next time just don't ~~suck him off~~ make sweeping claims of someone's impeccable character unless you're prepared for someone else who's had personal experience to the contrary to pipe up. That'd be good enough.
if that's too much of an ask I can always just block you as well, though, I genuinely don't care. Out of sight, out of mind.
So I said "Hey here's what I think"
And so then you said "well you're WRONG because here's what I think instead"
So far so good
And then I said "Well I have reasons for what I think and you seem to be just shouting your opinion and only that so it seems like I win"
And then you said "HOW DARE YOU HERE'S WHAT I THINK YOU'RE BEING UNFAIR"
And then I got even more sarcastic about it and now you are hurt because of it
It's understandable I guess. I still think that opinion + reasons is better than just OPINION OPINION OPINION even if I do grasp that you might have had different experiences than I have had and so different perspectives to bring to bear. Like I say you are refusing to elaborate even in the slightest which I feel like is a fair thing to ask you to do if you're going to call another human being a "twat."
All good, you're free to block me if the sarcasm is overly hurtful, I do do that sometimes.
edit: goodness, that's a long reply and from just skimming the start of it, it seems you went to a lot of trouble to make a strawman. Too bad I ain't reading allat, you take care now.
Apology accepted, you too
Wth is going on with the db0 instance? Db0 the guy seems very chill and understanding, at least in the posts I've seen.
Db0 is still very chill and understanding. Seems like the person reported here is having a hard time recently
Oof.
That's legit. The UN report clearly found that people from the Hamas side of the fighting had committed widespread sexual assaults. Bringing up misleading talking points and blog posts to try to spin it around into the report finding the opposite is textbook misinformation.
I actually don't agree with banning people for this type of misinformation, I think arguing back in kind is the right way in most cases. But if you're going to ban misinformation (which most of Lemmy seems to think is okay), then this is a pretty reasonable ban.
(It's probably offtopic to get into an extended argument about the original Hamas sexual assault claims under this post... if anyone wants to re-inaugurate my whole "debatebro" community by having it out with me there about it though let me know and I'm down a little later today.)
As far as I can tell, literally the only thing the dude does is post about cool stuff and chat.
Nobody's perfect.
He was also involved in the 196 forced migration attempt: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/35965565?scrollToComments=true
Yeah. I missed some drama because I tend to avoid lemmy.world politics forums because they are unbearable. Point taken.
Oh, yeah I think I argued with that guy when I was drunk once. Coolio
I'm not really seeing any receipts, so I'm going to have to go with "power tripping admins abusing power" on this one.
Honestly, if you look at the receipts, it's even worse. It's a pattern of instance admins harassing this guy, banning him, and then accusing him of being abusive somehow to them (by, for example, using his downvote button) and also telling people he's a piece of shit.
It’s a pattern of instance admins harassing this guy
Someone should really ask for receipts on this one.
Look below, we're discussing it with links and examples. Maybe "harassing" is a stretch, but they're definitely singling him out for insults, accusations, and moderator actions in a way that to me is wildly un-called for.
I think even you have pointed to it, but PJ is a prolific poster. If he's having a bad moment (as everyone does on occasion), it's not just a couple of comments, it's hundreds.
When pugjesus gets into it with someone or about something, it's a bonafide flood of activity. If it were any other user I might even agree with you that it's unfair, but pugjesus is not 'any other user'. Having been on the receiving end of his ire before, I really have to say that it's appropriate to hand out a temp ban.
Everyone needs time to touch grass sometimes -not more than when you're days-deep into a posting bender.
People are allowed to argue on the internet, no?
We seem to have moved the goalsposts from "he's abusive" to "he was banned from blahaj which as everyone knows means he definitely actually did something" to "he argues about politics how dare."
170+ comments in a day is not simply 'arguing about politics'. Even then, though, not every community or instance allows just any kind of arguing, and not every mod will tolerate a flood of reports about a single user arguing just a bit too aggressively. Especially when the specifics of the argument are borderline rulebreaking by themselves.
We seem to have moved the goalsposts from “he’s abusive” to “he was banned from blahaj which as everyone knows means he definitely actually did something” to “he argues about politics how dare.”
Sorry, who's moving the goalposts? You accused the admins of 'harassing' him, then backed down to 'unfairly singling him out'. It would be impossible to 'single him out' any more than he has already distinguished himself by the shear volume of his activity. A one-off heated comment is very different than dozens and dozens.
I am aware of your personal political alignment with PJ, so I understand you may identify with the content of his commenting - but the shear volume of it is enough on its own to warrant intervention.
It's only a temp ban, anyway - a glorified time-out. I'm fine with leaving it as a disagreement.
Why did you feel the need to censor the user name? You know the modlog is public?
Mostly trying to abide by the somewhat imprecise rules of the community as a formality.
When posting screenshots of drama, you must obscure the identity of all the participants.
I have to 'obscure the identity of the participant in the screenshot' in this context meaning blurring usernames, sure no problem. Nobody ever said anything about obscuring non- personally identifying information sources - like the community the modlog came from - that interested people can go out of their way to track down.
Huh. Yeah, makes sense.
May be this (emphasis mine):
Removed Comment
Me: "Oh look, the ghost said something stupid again. I wonder what they've been up to." [clicks profile] [sure enough, more stupid things are said, including blatant misinformation] Sorry that you say stupid things and break the rules, I guess? > I recall a few weeks back he said that because I don’t call out .ml that much (funny how he ignores me calling out Hexbear) I somehow must mass downvote his posts across lemmy. lol I'm sure you can quote me. It would be awful if your memory was as poor as your ability to construct coherent arguments. AND a place of honor in your bio? That's unironically great. Thanks for helping spread me all over the Fediverse!
Maybe the admin misread? Or they read that and then actually checked the data and found PJ did downvote all that other users stuff or smthn.
I tried to take a short look at the data but PJ has over 150k votes which probably breaks the page I use. (Admins can natively see this info in lemmy)
