Grumpus_Maximus
@Grumpus_Maximus@thelemmy.club
- Comment on Moderator abuse: Request for review and removal of Decoy321@lemmy.world 4 days ago:
You’re missing the context and therefore completely reversing the point of the meme.
Trump saw the images from Ceuta and immediately turned a humanitarian/migration crisis into political propaganda. He called it an “invasion,” said Spain “doesn’t know what to do,” warned that America would look the same if Democrats won, and even said Republicans should use the images of Ceuta in the midterm campaign.
That rhetoric is what this meme is making fun of.
The LOTR image is deliberately taking Trump’s “foreign invasion” framing to its absurd conclusion: Oh, an invasion? So apparently Trump thinks Ceuta looks like Helm’s Deep with a giant enemy army at the gates.
I’m not comparing migrants to evil orcs. I’m mocking the racist/xenophobic rhetoric that portrays migrants as a hostile invading army in the first place.
You can argue that the satire wasn’t obvious enough without the Trump context. That’s fair. But once you actually know the context, treating the literal LOTR image as my view of migrants gets the joke completely backwards. The dehumanizing “invading enemy” framing is precisely what the meme is ridiculing.
- Comment on Moderator abuse: Request for review and removal of Decoy321@lemmy.world 5 days ago:
thats the point im trying to make - this is no a racist meme:
www.reddit.com/r/…/cueta_spain_right_now/ - up on reddit, no problems.
its a stupid shitpost. But I understand if you dont understand, not understanding is an epidemic. - Comment on Moderator abuse: Request for review and removal of Decoy321@lemmy.world 5 days ago:
Thanks, that clarifies the rules around my own community.
I think we’re probably talking past each other slightly on the main issue.
I genuinely do not care if a moderator needs to remove an individual meme. If an admin or moderator looks at something and decides it crosses a site-wide line, remove it. That’s not really what bothers me.
What bothers me is treating the characterization of these posts as “unquestionably racist” and then using that characterization to justify escalating bans.
The meme that resulted in the racism accusation came directly from Reddit and remains up there. I understand your point that Reddit’s moderation decisions don’t determine Lemmy.world’s rules. But Reddit also explicitly prohibits racist content, so its continued presence there is at least evidence that reasonable moderators can look at the same meme and not conclude that it is obviously racist.
That doesn’t prove Reddit got it right. But it does make me uncomfortable with the idea that Decoy’s interpretation is simply an objective fact rather than a moderator making a subjective judgment about an offensive joke.
That’s really the distinction I’m trying to make.
If the standard is:
“We think this joke crosses our line, so we’re removing it.”
Fine. I can live with that.
If the standard becomes:
“This is unquestionably racist content; therefore we’re justified in treating you as someone who repeatedly posts racist material and escalating from temporary to permanent bans.”
I think that requires a much stronger basis, particularly when the content is ambiguous enough to remain acceptable on another major platform with similar prohibitions against racism.
As for the comments you characterized as attacks or harassment, I would also ask that their context be considered. The comments you’re referring to were responses to people attacking or insulting me first. That doesn’t necessarily make every response of mine appropriate, and I’m perfectly willing to accept criticism for going too far in a response. But there’s an important difference between someone initiating harassment and someone responding -perhaps too aggressively -to hostility directed at them.
And regarding my earlier comment about Reddit provocateurs: My point is - practical outcome of @Decoy321@lemmy.world style of moderation is indistinguishable from what a Reddit agent would do.
piefed.world/c/shitposts was barely active when I started contributing to it. I then contributed hundreds of posts and substantially increased its activity. Permanently banning only people actually supplying that content has effectively stopped those contributions and pushed that activity elsewhere.
That’s exactly the outcome somebody trying to keep users on Reddit rather than building competing communities would want.
I’m pointing out that the effect of the moderation is remarkably aligned with that outcome: discourage prolific contributors, reduce activity in an alternative community, and make Reddit the easier place to find and share this type of content.
Ultimately, I’m not asking for immunity from moderation. I’m asking for some proportionality.
If one meme out of dozens or hundreds crosses a line I didn’t recognize, remove the meme and tell me why. I can adjust what I post going forward.
That’s very different from assuming malicious intent, applying labels to the content as though there can be no reasonable disagreement about them, and eventually permanently banning someone who was otherwise actively contributing to the community.
As for
c/shitposts, I understand your answer: I can set a much more permissive standard for offensive/tasteless humor, but Lemmy.world’s site-wide rules remain the ceiling. That’s fair, and I’ll operate the community accordingly. - Comment on Moderator abuse: Request for review and removal of Decoy321@lemmy.world 5 days ago:
Thank you for taking the time to review this with the other admins.
I understand the decision, even though I fundamentally disagree with it.
What I am struggling with is the standard being applied here. You state that whether I am racist or ableist is “not up for debate,” which I appreciate. But at the same time, a moderator is permitted to publicly characterize my contributions as “racist shit” and impose a ban on that basis.
That distinction matters to me. If you’re unwilling to characterize me as racist based on these posts, I don’t think a moderator should be casually assigning that characterization either.
I’m also having difficulty reconciling the acknowledgement that these communities do not have formal rules covering some of this content with the conclusion that permanent bans for such content are nevertheless entirely appropriate based on “simple common sense.”
This is a shitposting community. The entire genre involves absurd, provocative, offensive and intentionally tasteless humor. That obviously doesn’t mean absolutely anything must be permitted, but if particular categories of offensive humor are prohibited, I think those boundaries should be stated in the rules rather than discovered after the fact through bans.
Otherwise, we’re effectively asking users to follow rules that aren’t written down and allowing individual moderators to decide where an invisible line is.
That brings me to one clarification I’d genuinely appreciate:
If I create and moderate my own community on Lemmy.world, am I permitted to establish community rules explicitly allowing provocative, offensive and tasteless shitposting, provided the content remains within Lemmy.world’s site-wide rules?
For example, I would want to make it explicit that content isn’t removed merely because somebody finds it offensive, crude or in poor taste, while still enforcing whatever content Lemmy.world prohibits at the instance level.
If that’s permitted, then I think creating a community with clearly defined expectations may simply be the better solution.
- Comment on Moderator abuse: Request for review and removal of Decoy321@lemmy.world 5 days ago:
There was no warning discussion or communication of any kind.
Even a simple removal of the post would have been better if moderators see content as unfit.
Banning only active contributors from a dead community is idiotic and only benefits reddit
- Submitted 6 days ago to support@lemmy.world | 16 comments
- Comment on [deleted] 2 weeks ago:
whatever. have no content if you like. not gonna waste my time
- Comment on [deleted] 2 weeks ago:
whatever. have no content if you like. not gonna waste my time
- Comment on [deleted] 2 weeks ago:
answer the question - why is this not banned from reddit then?
These posts are still up on Reddit, where thousands of people have seen it. Clearly not everyone interprets it the same way. Reddit would have definitely banned it would it be racist
- Comment on [deleted] 2 weeks ago:
That’s a pretty low bar for calling someone racist.
You can think a post crossed the line without deciding the person behind it is racist. Those aren’t the same thing.
I think it’s fair to judge the content. I don’t think it’s fair to judge someone’s character from a single repost.
- Comment on [deleted] 2 weeks ago:
I’m not arguing everyone has to like the memes.
I’m objecting to the leap from “this post violates our rules” to “you’re racist.”
Those are two very different claims. If the content isn’t welcome in that community, that’s the moderators’ call. But labeling someone’s character based on a single meme is a much more serious accusation, and I don’t think that’s justified.
- Submitted 2 weeks ago to [deleted] | 95 comments
- Submitted 2 weeks ago to [deleted] | 33 comments
- Submitted 2 weeks ago to [deleted] | 2 comments
- Submitted 2 weeks ago to [deleted] | 14 comments
- Submitted 2 weeks ago to [deleted] | 7 comments
- Submitted 2 weeks ago to [deleted] | 0 comments
- No worries, companies of 3d printers will find out how to scam their customers soon toothelemmy.club ↗Submitted 2 weeks ago to [deleted] | 46 comments
- Submitted 2 weeks ago to [deleted] | 33 comments
- Submitted 3 weeks ago to [deleted] | 25 comments
- Submitted 3 weeks ago to [deleted] | 60 comments
- Submitted 3 weeks ago to [deleted] | 5 comments
- Submitted 3 weeks ago to [deleted] | 12 comments
- Comment on this absolute bullshit from reddit 4 weeks ago:
Telegram the same way. Fuck those assholes
- Comment on A Majority of Americans Now Support Seizing Wealth From AI Industry 4 weeks ago:
The problem is they over borrowed and dont make any money.
- Submitted 4 weeks ago to [deleted] | 11 comments
- Submitted 4 weeks ago to [deleted] | 4 comments
- Submitted 4 weeks ago to [deleted] | 36 comments
- Submitted 4 weeks ago to [deleted] | 9 comments
- Submitted 1 month ago to [deleted] | 16 comments
