Would they go to all that effort to nab a few downloaders? They don’t even get prosecuted if caught, usually.

I quite like the idea of a standard format. It might help to communicate the intent of the community better since that was a problem recently.

Something like:

1. Which mods/admins were being Power Tripping Bastards?
2. What sanction did they impose? (e.g. community ban, instance ban, removed comment)
3. Provide a screenshot and explanation of the cause of the sanction. (e.g. the post that was removed, or got you banned)
4. Provide a screenshot of the modlog entry (don’t deobfuscate mod names)
5. Explain why you think its unfair and how you would like the situation to be resolved

Maybe?

“Western” is just a euphemism for white supremacy and “westerner” is just a euphemism for pale skin.

You’re sailing very close to the shores of tankie-land with this campist statement.

lol good advice

An der Éierlechkeet hunn ech dës Sprooch reng fir de komesche Wäert gewielt. Ech sinn e falschen Hond wahrscheinlech. Ech sinn iwwerrascht datt Dir et wësst!

I think we figured it out in the end.

That seems to me like a wilful misinterpretation. And we have clarified what it means to you multiple times now, if you were somehow unable to get the gist of it from reading other posts in the community. I think there’s plenty of context here now for people to make an assessment of whether db0 was power tripping in removing your post, so I’ll leave it at that.

Ech schwätze kee Wuert vun dëser domm Sprooch, dat ass wéi.

There was no “unspoken rule” involved here. It’s literally the first community rule in the sidebar. If you’re just gonna make stuff up about being the victim of “unspoken rules” then this discussion might as well end here tbh. I’ll note that nobody else has misunderstood that rule.

If you didn’t feel willing or able to adequately express your position in the comments on the original post then that’s a shame, but them’s the breaks. Being a mod is a tough gig. You’ve now had the chance to have your say across multiple communities. And the offer is still open to pin your response blog entry to the original post.

Et huet eng anstänneg Bewäertung, also firwat net?

hues du iwwerluecht ënnert den Fersen vun dengen Ënnerdrécker eraus ze kommen?

Ok I’m sort of following along here.

1. The initial messages here were complaints about me. Technically their feelings were hurt.
2. I initially went away to talk about my perspective. I wasn’t dissatisfied about that. It was Blaze, who is like the fediverse peacekeeper at this point, who told me to share it here.

Ok got it, so you were the accused PTB in the original post here.

3. Upon sharing it here, I was silenced even though it didn’t break any written rules. Which Blaze agreed with later on. I was told in the response to share it elsewhere. My feelings were not hurt, as shown by the fact I complied.

In what way were you silenced? Nobody banned you from here or stopped you participating in the original discussion according to the modlog. So no PTB there. In fact you were encouraged to simply post your response in the original discussion thread and db0 even offered to sticky it there so that it would get sufficient visibility.

But you wanted a completely separate post to complain that nobody took your side in the original discussion, and you didn’t get your own way about it. But the best place for your response was in the original post, along with all the context.

4. When I complied, the mod of !yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com who told me to go elsewhere with it came to me and made a fuss. That’s where the rules were spoken about. It was that mod who told me he would rather I talk about it here. Again, my feelings were not hurt during that, as shown by the fact I complied about that too.

The so-called fuss, which was just responding to your questions & comments:

5. Here we are.

Yes, here we are. So let me sum up.

1. You were posted about in YPTB for banning people for supporting Luigi Mangione. The community rendered its judgment and most folks thought you were being a PTB.
2. You then wrote a confusing blog post about how you were right to ban those people, and wanted to post it in a second YPTB post. This second post did not meet our community rules and was removed. Those rules have now been repeatedly explained to you and clarified. You were offered a “right of reply” in the original post with a stickied comment. It was suggested to you that if you want to make the post, do it somewhere else.
3. You came back here to complain about db0 removing your (second) post, as db0 suggested you should do if you feel it was a PTB move. Unfortunately you then confused the hell out of everyone, me included, by writing about it in an incredibly confusing and disjointed way.

So the only topic of THIS post per point 3 should be about whether is was justified to have your second “right of reply” post removed according to our sidebar rules. Your assertion seems to be that db0 was power tripping by doing that.

I hope this clarifies for everyone. And I think the removal of your second post was completely warranted by the community rules because it was about you justifying yourself, more than anything else.

not yourself today?

You being a mod or not is irrelevant. Can you point to the specific part of your blog post that mentions a Mod being a Power Tripping Bastard (PTB)? Because all I’m seeing that’s vaguely related is:

Person G, of all the people who responded to his remark, to, at one point, reveal themselves to be far more explicit in allegiance with the criminal named after the plumber, leading to their own banishment, which in turn added to the reaction as they joined forces with Person F, causing everyone to call Person C a tyrant, since they are making it sound like she is just banishing anyone she feels like.

Which just makes it sound like you are talking about yourself being the PTB, which has already been established.

Nobody uses the exact wording. But this is a theme, and the biggest example of this is in the proof of one of the messages of mine that got removed, when I was blamed for not picking something up from this community’s rules that is not specified.

Edit: So the removal reason is included above as well as the relevant rule. It’s literally the first community rule in the sidebar.

Thank you for this summary. I found it difficult to follow the original. It would be useful to have a similar list from OP about the specific mod actions they are complaining about, because most of this seems very vibes based and mostly revolves around them expecting people to agree with them, but finding the opposite.

I’ll just quickly remind you this is literally an Anarchist server, so it’s unlikely you’re gonna find much sympathy for your views here.

Many of us aren’t based in the US. So when you say “the law” which law specifically are you talking about?

I honestly can’t follow what your complaint is any more. Were you actually banned from anywhere or did you just get your feelings hurt by having your blog post removed from this community?

It’s not at all clear to me that your original post of any of this post meets the Rule 1 criteria: Post only about bans or other sanctions from mod(s).

CLM. It’s not a support issue really, although perhaps their more technical admins keep an eye on that community so that could have been the reason? If they genuinely can’t keep up with the technical demands of running a large instance then it’s important to acknowledge that. Spreading the load across multiple smaller instances, as the fediverse was intended to work, might be a good way of addressing the issue.

PTB. At most this should have been a removal (like if they assumed you were trolling without looking into all the details) which may have simply been a CLM situation.

YDI

The comment from @ProfessorOwl_PhD@hexbear.net on your original post before it was removed hit the nail on the head imo:

I think the way you talk around the issue (e.g. “a man named after a certain plumber”) really demonstrates an underlying understanding that you’re in the wrong here: you’re avoiding direct confrontation with him and his motives in order to paint this as a simple murder. You linked to excuses about how Brian Thompson was actually innocent, because denying life saving medical coverage isn’t technically the same thing as personally murdering them, despite having the same effect. You paint agreement with his actions with pledging direct allegiance to him personally.

There are legitimate arguments around not lionising his actions (as Hexbear discussed at the time), but you’re just getting upset about civility and direct violence disrupting the indirect violence of capitalism.

Let’s get real here. The State has a monopoly on violence in most countries. That’s one of the ways they keep control of the population. That’s why it’s perceived as such a threat to the State when ordinary people use violence to challenge the status quo. The State made it perfectly legal for people to like Brian Thompson to deny life saving treatments and procedures from the sick and dying in order to turn a larger profit margin. That is an example of state-sanctioned violence. All those involved should be in prison and held accountable. But they never will be, because State is organized around protecting the rich and powerful from the consequences of their deeply immoral, unethical and (ought to be illegal) acts that turn a profit. Don’t forget that slavery was legal and Nazi concentration camps were legal at the time. That’s why your moralizing position rings hollow. Because all you are doing in effect is defending the right of the state to continue with it’s immoral agenda of exploiting the sick and poor for profit, without ever having to accept any consequences for it.

When the justice system is corrupt, when the laws are written by lobbyists, when politicians from both sides of the aisle are bought and paid for by corporations, what other option do we have to resist the abuses of the rich and powerful? This is why people consider Luigi a bit of a folk hero. Because he gave people a bit of hope that real change was possible, and that (at least occasionally) the rich and powerful might get what’s coming to them.

On another topic, your original blog post was imo not in keeping sidebar rules, especial rule 1:

Post only about bans or other sanctions from mod(s).

It seems to me you are more upset that basically nobody here agrees with your position on this topic, rather than because of any PTB issues.