I swear I've seen this same situation some time ago including with the exact misspelling. Could be a coincidence, though.
EDIT: searching misspelling banned gives a comment by OP from 23 days ago (but the post is gone). I'm assuming what I remember seeing was probably this post before it was deleted and reposted.
i was banned by this mod for politely noting how certain comments lead to escalation of inappropriate behavior. i noted how by bantering with infringing accounts after comment removal, [email protected] mods actually increased the work they needed to do to remove abusive content and amplified toxic voices as a whole. i used no unkind language and really at the time i genuinely hoped for improvement to the quality of the community.
their response?
permabanned
for “mod abuse”
one month after i made the post in question
don’t use [email protected]. their entire mod team is dedicated to just kind of fucking around in a sandbox with thousands of users, not to creating a space for genuine constructive world news engagement. preferably also just stop using lemmy.world when possible.
I am definitely considering switching from lemmy.world after the blatent censoring of posts and comments from large communities that happened the past few days.
Yeah I have no problem moving it, but I think it might be actually more useful keeping it on LW?
It's more of a roadsign to point from the most popular instance to lesser popular instances. If we put the sign on a lower traffic instance less people will see it.
Yesterday when all this came out I immediately applied to my new instance and let me tell you- seeing all the content I was missing from the places world has defederated has been a blast!
"Against me? No. The differentiator I experience is because I'm male. I've had a lot of anti-male sentiment. I lost a job because of it. Because somebody didn't like having talking to a guy. Such is life."
That’s kind of what I meant by the incel thing. To be it reads like “I was talking to coworkers in a terribly sexist and misogynistic manner and I got fired. That’s how a TOP 1% MAN speaks, so obviously I got fired because someone doesn’t like having to talk to a man, not because I’m a piece of shit with no self-awareness.”
The whole bit about sympathizing with the BLM protesters but wishing they would protest in places where cops have actually shot people instead of in his city because it inconvenienced him screams that he’s unaware of both his privilege and his power, which only reinforces the whole lack of self-awareness thing.
Wait, what? FlyingSquid seems fine. In the only drama I saw involving them, it seemed to me like they were in the right. I asked someone who was all heated up about what a POS they were for some details or examples, and literally all they could come up with was a single un-called for message FlyingSquid sent to one user months ago, which for a full-time moderator means they're way ahead of the curve.
Edit: Maybe I should ask for examples, what did FlyingSquid do?
FlyingSquid has a tendency to threaten moderator action in response to arguments they're heavily involved in, which often comes off as a last-ditch effort to 'win'.
Well, that's not ideal. Have they actually taken action on it, though? If it's just getting heated in an argument, that definitely seems not as bad as handing out bans for misspelling "Palestinian" or talking about jury nullification.
You're talking about the exchange featuring your statements "The victim gave consent (as far as a 12-year old can do that of course). She in fact started self-harming because he got convicted and still does not regret or feel bad about the encounter." and "According to the case notes, the attraction was mutual. He did not have to coerce her, by her own statements. It's why he wasn't convicted of grooming. Seriously, do at least a modicum of research." Right? That's the only time I see that anyone moderated you. Also, it wasn't FlyingSquid that gave you that ban. They were just arguing with you, and then I think someone else banned you for your statements.
Here's what Wikipedia says about Steven van de Velde:
He was convicted of child rape in 2016; in 2014, when Van de Velde was 19, he raped a 12-year-old British girl, after contacting her on social media, travelling to Britain to meet her, and giving her alcohol.
This is, to me, yet another example of FlyingSquid doing absolutely nothing wrong, and then people spreading rumors about how they're terrible.
Hmm, I must have misread the modlog then. I thought I swore I got a message from them stating I was banned.
Just to clarify (without getting into it any further), that guy was convicted for rape (never disputed that) but explicitly cleared of the grooming charge, because there was nothing in their exchanged messages that suggested grooming at all. The broader argument was that this guy is definitely a total fucking idiot who should have known so much better, but he didn't have the characteristics of some precalculating serial child rapist or something. The case details is also why he was convicted of a lesser charge in the Netherlands. He took all the necessary steps (therapy, avoiding solo contact with kids despite being cleared by therapists, etc...) to avoid this from happening again. I challenged his "irredeemability" that was present in that thread, which is a very accepted view in the Netherlands but not so abroad. Possibly because whilst Dutch sources have a lot of the details of the case, the English sources are much less in-depth.
I don't really have any other grievances against FS btw. They can be a bit headstrong and combative at times, but I don't know much else about them.
For what it's worth, I don't think you should receive a temp ban for those statements. I think you are wrong, but I don't think we need to remove every wrong statement from the comments to keep them as "correct" comments only. I think people can say things, and we can just all talk to each other, and it's okay. There are some things that I think should be banned from the comments: Misrepresenting why you are saying what you're saying, or deliberately egging on a confrontation, or using multiple accounts to create a false consensus. But almost any real individual who's just saying what they think and why, I think is okay.
The point that I'm making about FlyingSquid is that the way you told the story was that you argued with them, you were right and they were wrong and you demonstrated that with evidence, and then they banned you. Then, looking into the facts, nothing remotely similar to that happened in any respect. That's the pattern I've consistently seen about people who are critical of FlyingSquid's moderation. I don't know why that is, although I have a theory that because they are generally on point about moderating certain types of toxic individuals, there's a whisper campaign by certain toxic individuals trying to paint them as some particular type of bad moderator even if the facts don't support it.
It's not even all that hard to misconstrue some event that happened into some huge malicious deal that it isn't, as you just discovered.
Yes, absolutely. If you support all your claims with good sources, maintain a civil demeanour, and clearly hold the superior argument he will go through your entire history to find something, anything, to justify action no matter how irrelevant or ancient the reason.
If you're that interested just go through his comment history. He's not shy about doing the same in his comments. Usually it is just a thinly veiled threat.
What you're saying sounds to me a bit like one can break community rules if mods won't notice right away. If community rules were broken, I don't think it matters much if it happened right now or earlier. Besides, I would also expect that someone breaking the rules will not argue in good faith.
So, to me this example doesn't prove what you imply.
That's not really handing out a ban, though. That was my question on "taking action" about it. Talking in comments is different.
I'm curious to see if this is in response to him "losing" the argument, or if it's in response to someone being personally hostile to him, and him pointing out that if they're doing that to other people they may get moderated for it. Most of what I've been seeing that is summarized as the first thing is actually the second thing.
I'm not sure if they actually have. I know they've publicly called people out for reports which isn't great, and have made threats based on reporting content multiple times, something that isn't possible in lemmy, the content in question at the time was spam.
Yeah, that's the one un-called for message I talked about. It's not ideal but everyone swears there are all these examples of FlyingSquid doing much worse, and then if I ask for examples, it's either that one message, backpedaling from the earlier claims, or else it's something that when I look at it is a wild mischaracterization of something perfectly reasonable.
Fair enough. I think I can just search for the following you around behavior you described, and take a look at it and see how it seems to me.
Not that I’m doubting you necessarily, but there is some pretty wild revisionist history in these comments, all of it not matching the evidence on examination and all of it pointing to exactly the same conclusion, which is pretty weird. So I’d like to look for myself.
And they're arguably wrong a LOT. Not only that but everything is always black and white with them, there is no grey area or different perspectives possible.
As a rule, strong feelings about issues do not emerge from deep understanding.
Yeah. I haven't seen FS abuse his power, but man he will just be clearly in the wrong side of an argument and refuse to admit it. Not somebody I enjoy having a debate with, but he keeps his personal disagreements separate from his mod role, and I respect that.
I think he's partially disabled or something, which is how he has so much free time. I feel like he's said something like that, or that he has some kind of chronic condition.
Which is no excuse for having shit netizen behavior.
From what I've seen FlyingSquid tends to be quite fair when moderating, doesn't abuse the mod tools and is quite respectful and civil outside of the mod role. On occasion I've had disagreements and civil arguments with squid, and not once has the hammer been used as a conversation-ending argument.
I've asked people over and over for a single example of FlyingSquid doing this. Only one person has responded, and that was with an "example" where neither the argument with FlyingSquid nor FlyingSquid being the one that banned them was truthful. This is one of the reasons I think this is a deliberate attempt to start destructive rumors about him.
Edit: Someone else has now given an example. They had said that someone was, among other things, a "fucking shitwit," "self righteous piece of subhuman filth," "a fucking idiot," "fucking brain dead," "your argument is stupid and you deserve what the republicans are gonna do to you," and that they "hope it’s painful and prolonged." Then they got a three day ban, and then said the ban was a way for FlyingSquid to wield his mod powers to "win" the argument against their clearly superior position.
There's a firmly held belief by a certain segment of the community that everyone on Lemmy is liberals who will ban you if you are anti-genocide. Everyone on Lemmy is anti-genocide. Complaining that it's full of these liberals and pro-genocide people is just a way to do some aggrieved whining whenever someone is disagreeing with some total nonsense. "We need to hate on Biden because genocide" "Yes but Trump is ten times worse" "Oh I see, you're one of those pro-genocide people trying to censor me" is roughly how it goes.
Most people are anti-genocide. I think many people do not agree on what genocide is. There's a large segment of people who believe Israel is in a perpetual existential crisis, surrounded by countries full of people who think Israel shouldn't exist and that pretty much goes for Jews in general; and that Israel is merely defending itself. Personally, while I do agree that Israel is surrounded by a lot of people who don't think it should exist, I also believe this does not justify their (collective) behaviors: the settlements, and the genocide in Palestinian.
So the person you replied to was, I think, saying that most people oppose Genocide, many disagree on whether what Israel is doing is genocide, and a few would like to see some ethnic and/or cultural groups entirely eradicated. I agree with GP that the last group is relatively small.
Maybe I should have said "99%", I have seen some overtly pro-Israel users. They're pretty few and far between, though. The vast majority of the time, it's someone using a lazy strawman to attack someone by pretending they like genocide, instead of dealing directly with what they're saying.
Can you link me to some examples of defense of genocide? I can pretty much guarantee you that whatever example you send me is not going to be a defense of genocide, it's just going to be some opinion you disagree with which you are pretending implies support for genocide, so you don't have to engage with what it actually says.
You messaged me, man. There wasn't benefit for you in typing up your opinion in the first place, either. If you're willing to spend time yelling about how it is, but not willing to demonstrate how it actually is when asked questions about it, then I'm going to draw the obvious conclusion.
Lemmy.World mods are extremely Zionist and frequently ban users for saying anything remotely pro Palestinian or making a claim about Israel without evidence.
Saying 20.000 killed Palestinians were Hamas without evidence to justify the genocide however, is totally fine.
A very open Zionist "gedeliyah" got promoted to mod on their news community.
I just checked. It was two days ago, but the story about Amnesty International declaring it a genocide is still on the second page of results on ![email protected], and the very top story on ![email protected] after a series of ones about the United shooting is about Israel killing an American family right after the US government told them where they were so they could avoid killing them.
If the lemmy.world mods are banning people for saying anything remotely pro-Palestinian, they must be busy with something else right now. Are you sure that someone wasn't calling for Israeli civilians to be killed, or something, and got banned for that? Because that might seem similar, to someone with a particular type of mindset, but it's not the same thing, and pretending it's that first thing when it's the second is dishonest.
That is one good example but still pretty milquetoast. I'm talking full on articles about Israel openly calling for genocide and that mod barges in with the 'actually there are a few bad apples in Israel but that genocide thing is really what Hamas to do to Israel.'
And after doing that for a few months that the LemmyWorld team decided "yeah this guy has what it takes to become a mod here".
I was banned from c/politics by that same mod because of bullshit reasons too. They're a petty tyrant who can't handle anything that might disrupt their echo chamber.
I feel the separation between staff and user has already been entrenched.
Looking at modlogs, at times the given reasons show to me at least that they, the mods, have grown tired and are now settling on getting rid of potential trouble rather than fixing it.
Experienced can also mean jaded and in that state of mind you no longer care about circumstances, you just want to get shit done so you'll be rid of another stress you don't want to deal with.
Mods also need a timeout. The volunteer excuse can only work for so long. A way has to be found to prevent them from feeling like they're in a deadend job where they're only greeted with hostility. We need a mod relaxation and decompression program.
Moderation is like politics, and inherently attracts the most narcissistic and authoritarian, so it must be decentralized. As in users have to mod 1 comment/post for every n number of comments/posts they post &/or read after they've been active n number of months, but it would need to be done by averaging moderation across a random sample of users; preferencing users who are least bias and more trusted over time (but without growing dependent on them or their own safe spaces). I'd be happy to mod if it were an occasional part of participation, but I don't want to mod everything, or it to be expected of me when I'm busy with life, or to do it permanently.
FYI Lemmy will ultimately fail because the lead dev is a pathetic despot tankie manchild, as bad as the worst mods on reddit. He created Lemmy to admin ml as his own safe space. He will never give up the power it's given him. It will need to be forked to solve the core problems.
As in users have to mod 1 comment/post for every n number of comments/posts they post &/or read after they’ve been active n number of months, but it would need to be done by averaging moderation across a random sample of users; preferencing users who are least bias and more trusted over time (but without growing dependent on them or their own safe spaces)
Nice idea. Mods are hard to find indeed, and this system could help
So excluding people due to a potential: innocent mistake, minor lack of knowledge, language difference (as simple as UK vs US English, and or different spelling from a different language you might speak. Either way, if you look it up, the spelling you used is not uncommon, it's even used in some MSM reports and documentaries), learning and or one of many other disabilities, shit device.
And they say we create echo chambers when we want to get away from such bullshit.
The fancy name for that is "linguistic prejudice". It's as old as language, and deeply ingrained in human societies, and it's typically subconscious - like, you don't even know why you don't like a certain feature, until you try to find which groups use it.
With that said, if I saw someone spell "palastinian" I'd expect the person to be an English monolingual. Native speakers tend to remember words by their spoken form (non-native ones often do it by the written form), and /ə/ can be represented by ⟨a⟩ or ⟨e⟩ there anyway.
I love the link by the way. Good example of the issue.
wtf is it with lemmy world mods. you think this is reddit? do you want your instance to be an echo champer or want users to just leave and join another?
I got perma banned from reddit for telling pedophiles in the doctor disrespect community that regardless of legality, fucking a 16 year old makes you a scumbag. Funny that.
I got permabanned once for saying the pedophile lead singer of Lostprophets deserves to die in the least humane way possible, I appealed by saying "Google his name and tell me you don't agree", 3 days later I got my account back.
The admins may be massive assholes with no lives, but they do have some form of basic morals.
The dude was one of the vilest forms of pedos and I stand by my statement, that dude deserves to die a slow and horrible death that breaks the Geneva convention.
Edit: Also, this is why trolling shouldn't be against the rules... it's way too subjective and always ends up getting abused by shitty mods. I get that people don't like trolling but it's better to be specific and ban the obnoxious things trolls do instead of trying to speculate about their state of mind.
Hmm, yeah i thought trolling is specific enough but after some thought it could mean prank(in a good way) or deliberately provoke with inflammatory statement without the intention of debate. So i agree.
it’s better to be specific and ban the obnoxious things trolls do instead of trying to speculate about their state of mind.
I couldn't agree more with this.
The difference between a troll and a genuine poster is intention - but nobody knows someone else's intentions. And mods should not act based on what they don't know.
I have said it multiple times (many times removed) but Jordanlund and Flyingsquid are Jewish Supremacists that are pro-Israel in everything but name. They will show up to anything remotely Israel to defend Israel while saying they aren’t for Israel.
It's a systematic problem. The large LW communities have a stranglehold that prevents new ones from taking hold.
For Lemmy to improve, there needs to be a very easy way to find new communities, particularly on different instances!
Currently there is no way to navigate communities on other instances without a direct keyword search, or by opening a private window to get the link directly from the other server as a logged off user. Clicking the 'Communities' link also needs to default to rising new communities, and not to existing communities.
There also needs to be a major change to the hot/active sorting algorithm to favor small communities with higher engagement % over large ones with higher net upvotes (lower engagement %). The top ten communities should be changing from month to month - otherwise large communities will only get further entrenched and moderation will only get worse.
This is a change that the devs would have to implement. Otherwise dbzer0 or lemmyzip or whatever other server that grows next will just eventually turn into LW and the same problem will repeat.
Does anyone know if these ideas have already been discussed in a closed pull request?
I just unsubscribed from almost all lemmy world communities and checked scaled and it's actually a decent sort. Before it was just spam and junk. Not sure why it changed so much.
Then you create a login on any other server, go to settings and import the file.
It does not transfer your comments and posts or any other community mod stuff. It is essentially a new account, but with the same user configurable settings.
To add to it, 90% of the people they call tankies are just leftists who want to learn from the good things that states like USSR and China have done. As if that means they endorse everything they've ever done. However if you try to point out the things America has done such as the multiple genocides we participated in, dictators we propped up, and so on, then that doesn't count towards them being... What do you call an American liberal tankie? Sherman's?
I was recently site wide banned for 30 days for something I said on LW so I blocked the entire instance. I wish this was just an LW issue but it feels like I have to walk carefully around glass. Ultimately what I said was wrong, but it's not a good look.
The evils are the same. There’s no lesser evil. Dead is dead is dead is dead, you fucking shitwit. You absolute twatwaffle. You self righteous piece of subhuman filth.
You do realize how incredibly stupid that argument is, don’t you? Please tell me you realize what a fucking idiot you are for saying something like that. I want to believe liberals aren’t so fucking brain dead. It was just sarcasm, right?
That’s not an ad hominem. If I say your argument is wrong because you’re a piece of shit, that’s an ad hominem. If I point out that the kids in Gaza are dead either way, so your argument is stupid and you deserve what the republicans are gonna do to you, and that I’ll enjoy watching liberals get their comeuppance and that I hope it’s painful and prolonged, that’s not an ad hominem. Learn what words mean before you use them, dumbass.
I don't think it was the part about ad hominem that led to the ban.
It's actually been really interesting reading how people summarize the interactions they had with moderators, and then looking at what actually happened, to see the parts they left out of the summary, and the stuff they put in the summary that wasn't there.
The people who attract moderator attention sometimes also tend to argue in bad faith and engage in personal attacks. Who knew.
Ha. Your post seemed perfectly fine, and the heavy-handed censorship of your discussion about moderation is a perfect example of why some people don't have the right temperament for moderation.
Jordanlund bans are very different from FlyingSquid bans. I realize jordanlund was the one who temp banned the parent comment, but mostly I was defending FlyingSquid here, in general. The disparity between "wild personal attacks and wishing suffering on other users = short temp ban" and "question the moderators = permaban from multiple big communities" is exactly a perfect example.
If you bring up anything remotely political you're absolutely going to get banned
I was banned from globalnews (or similar) for saying that killing civilians qwas bad even when Hamas did it. I was banned for being a 'genocide supporter'
And then I was banned from every single lemmy.ml community I was in (signal, fairphone, fdroid etc) for talking about the uyguhr genocide
So yeah, I should probably see this as a chance to quit social media completely and go touch grass
When you read this thread, pay attention to how "PhillipTheBucket" runs defense for LW mods. It's subtle and gross. Constantly asking for examples and arguing in bad faith.
"Supposed"? Claiming the "suffragettes were terrorists" when < 1% were involved is just plain wrong. With blanket statements like that you sound like a fascist propagandist, and your ban was justified. Thanks for sending me down that rabbit hole though.
Context is key. It looks like the suffragettes had been peacefully protesting for decades before a very small number resorted to militancy, and the result of their "terrorism" was minuscule — 4 deaths and 24 injuries total in 2 years — before they gave it up entirely when WW1 broke out.
Remember! To the monarchs, revolution was "terrorism". I'd never advocate for harming civilians, but "those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.'
Also western governments historically — especially the criminals in 3 letter agency secret police — have constantly used terrorism to advance their own political, economic, and military agendas around the world. They only decry terrorism when doing so is politically or financially advantageous, like lying about WMD's in Iraq to transfer trillions to their crony psychopaths in the MIC. Israel literally detonated thousands of pagers recently in a premeditated act of terrorism, but they're the "goodies" so the incidental murder of civilians is justified (/s #psychotic). The US drone program around the world IS terrorism too.
Authoritarians will never be overthrown peacefully, and all governments will always declare any insurgency terrorism; even when the insurgents have exhausted all other options and are explicitly targeting military. Hell, even Putin likely used the FSB to stage false flag terrorist attacks and seize power.
Surely this shall be recorded in the annals of history alongside other such historical zingers as "I know you are but that am i ?" or the seminal classic "Your Mother".
The world was really swell when I used to trust wikipedia as an unbiased source for any information that is even a glancingly, remotely political subject
Did you link this excellent article about suffragettes who learned jujitsu and used it to defend themselves against cops and chauvanists while protesting for women's right to vote? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffrajitsu
"where is the palestinian right to selfdefense" is dumb enough for a ban.
fuck hamas, herzbüllah and the other terror proxies. and those who did not fight them are collaborators.
remember this:
there are 9 ppl at a table and then a nazi joins. no one walks away? bam, 10 nazis.
Wait so in your view, the Nazis are Hamas? Israel is literally carrying out Liebenstraum. I in no way support radical Islamists, but Israel has historically supported Hamas over more moderate or secular political groups like the PLO. This is in line with the larger imperialist tendency to support radical islamists in middle eastern conflicts, such as the Mujahideen, a group that makes Al Qaida and Hamas look like boy scouts, with the aim of further destabilizing the region in order to secure mineral and oil rights for private interests. Palestine's most popular secular political leadwr, Marwan Barghouti, rots in an Israeli prison on made up charges subjected to constant torture since 10/7. This is what happened to the secular popular elements in Palestine, Israel terrorizs them! Israel terrorizes Palestine for 70 years, they created terrorists. This is obviously sad for regular Israelis, but especially Palestinians.
But come on. It's a genocide against civilians. You might as well blame Santa Claus if condemning Hamas, if you won't condemn the Israeli government that carries out these atrocities, as well as imperialism that perpetuates it and makes sure the right people benefit from the mass killing.
Hell, the IDF probably killed more Israelis on 10/7 than Hamas did. Where's your condemnation for them?
That's a funny thing to say about a people facing a genocide. Last I checked it wasn't the Nazis who were victims of apartheid and genocide but the ones doing those things. Like Israel. Have you no soul or have you simply not seen what Israel is doing? Would you like to read amnesty's report on why it's a genocide?
Power tripping bastard for sure, banning someone for misspelling words? If anything that makes him look like a troll, not the OP.
I swear I've seen this same situation some time ago including with the exact misspelling. Could be a coincidence, though.
EDIT: searching
misspelling bannedgives a comment by OP from 23 days ago (but the post is gone). I'm assuming what I remember seeing was probably this post before it was deleted and reposted.Probably. I did post this somewhere else and it was deleted. I didn't know of this place yet lol
Because it's clearly normal for your typography and patience to improve when you're pissed off
Not to mention autoincorrect having gotten so much worse over the years.
finally a space to diss on jordanlund bless 😭
i was banned by this mod for politely noting how certain comments lead to escalation of inappropriate behavior. i noted how by bantering with infringing accounts after comment removal, [email protected] mods actually increased the work they needed to do to remove abusive content and amplified toxic voices as a whole. i used no unkind language and really at the time i genuinely hoped for improvement to the quality of the community.
their response?
don’t use [email protected]. their entire mod team is dedicated to just kind of fucking around in a sandbox with thousands of users, not to creating a space for genuine constructive world news engagement. preferably also just stop using lemmy.world when possible.
I am definitely considering switching from lemmy.world after the blatent censoring of posts and comments from large communities that happened the past few days.
I appreciate my instance of Lemmy.zip. I've had no issues.
Hello,
Could we then consider moving [email protected] elsewhere?
Woah I had no idea this community existed. Cool idea.
Hopefully we'll move it soon ha ha
Yeah I have no problem moving it, but I think it might be actually more useful keeping it on LW?
It's more of a roadsign to point from the most popular instance to lesser popular instances. If we put the sign on a lower traffic instance less people will see it.
You can keep keep the current one on LW, but then have a pinned post pointing to the active one elsewhere
[email protected] has that
Also keep in mind that if things were to really go south, some instances might defed LW.
Actually, Beehaw is already defederated from LW
Yesterday when all this came out I immediately applied to my new instance and let me tell you- seeing all the content I was missing from the places world has defederated has been a blast!
Same! secret dbzer0 newcomer handshake
Fucking seriously, that dude is garbage.
"And despite his politics, he struggles to find sympathy or kinship with the Black Lives Matter marchers who occasionally disrupt his commute home to protest police violence."
This is some borderline incel bullshit here.
You ever read one thing about someone, and all of a sudden, everything about them comes into focus and makes sense?
I'm sure there is nothing else to the 'I lost my job because somebody didn't like having to talk to a guy' thing either.
That’s kind of what I meant by the incel thing. To be it reads like “I was talking to coworkers in a terribly sexist and misogynistic manner and I got fired. That’s how a TOP 1% MAN speaks, so obviously I got fired because someone doesn’t like having to talk to a man, not because I’m a piece of shit with no self-awareness.”
The whole bit about sympathizing with the BLM protesters but wishing they would protest in places where cops have actually shot people instead of in his city because it inconvenienced him screams that he’s unaware of both his privilege and his power, which only reinforces the whole lack of self-awareness thing.
This isn’t satire? It reads as satire…
I'm having trouble believing an article titled "White Progressive Discovers Portland's Unwanted Reputation" isn't satire.
If that's actually him I'll make that my profile picture and start posting in his subs more.
So their profile picture used to be a picture similar to that. And now theirs is a picture of I voted in Oregon...
Oh wow
Dude’s got the stereotypical incel attitude and the look. Built for modding.
Wait, what? FlyingSquid seems fine. In the only drama I saw involving them, it seemed to me like they were in the right. I asked someone who was all heated up about what a POS they were for some details or examples, and literally all they could come up with was a single un-called for message FlyingSquid sent to one user months ago, which for a full-time moderator means they're way ahead of the curve.
Edit: Maybe I should ask for examples, what did FlyingSquid do?
FlyingSquid has a tendency to threaten moderator action in response to arguments they're heavily involved in, which often comes off as a last-ditch effort to 'win'.
Well, that's not ideal. Have they actually taken action on it, though? If it's just getting heated in an argument, that definitely seems not as bad as handing out bans for misspelling "Palestinian" or talking about jury nullification.
I got a three day temp ban after providing examples and further context disproving their arguments.
Usually I think they aren't that bad, but they do sometimes lose their cool on sensitive subjects.
You're talking about the exchange featuring your statements "The victim gave consent (as far as a 12-year old can do that of course). She in fact started self-harming because he got convicted and still does not regret or feel bad about the encounter." and "According to the case notes, the attraction was mutual. He did not have to coerce her, by her own statements. It's why he wasn't convicted of grooming. Seriously, do at least a modicum of research." Right? That's the only time I see that anyone moderated you. Also, it wasn't FlyingSquid that gave you that ban. They were just arguing with you, and then I think someone else banned you for your statements.
Here's what Wikipedia says about Steven van de Velde:
This is, to me, yet another example of FlyingSquid doing absolutely nothing wrong, and then people spreading rumors about how they're terrible.
Hmm, I must have misread the modlog then. I thought I swore I got a message from them stating I was banned.
Just to clarify (without getting into it any further), that guy was convicted for rape (never disputed that) but explicitly cleared of the grooming charge, because there was nothing in their exchanged messages that suggested grooming at all. The broader argument was that this guy is definitely a total fucking idiot who should have known so much better, but he didn't have the characteristics of some precalculating serial child rapist or something. The case details is also why he was convicted of a lesser charge in the Netherlands. He took all the necessary steps (therapy, avoiding solo contact with kids despite being cleared by therapists, etc...) to avoid this from happening again. I challenged his "irredeemability" that was present in that thread, which is a very accepted view in the Netherlands but not so abroad. Possibly because whilst Dutch sources have a lot of the details of the case, the English sources are much less in-depth.
I don't really have any other grievances against FS btw. They can be a bit headstrong and combative at times, but I don't know much else about them.
For what it's worth, I don't think you should receive a temp ban for those statements. I think you are wrong, but I don't think we need to remove every wrong statement from the comments to keep them as "correct" comments only. I think people can say things, and we can just all talk to each other, and it's okay. There are some things that I think should be banned from the comments: Misrepresenting why you are saying what you're saying, or deliberately egging on a confrontation, or using multiple accounts to create a false consensus. But almost any real individual who's just saying what they think and why, I think is okay.
The point that I'm making about FlyingSquid is that the way you told the story was that you argued with them, you were right and they were wrong and you demonstrated that with evidence, and then they banned you. Then, looking into the facts, nothing remotely similar to that happened in any respect. That's the pattern I've consistently seen about people who are critical of FlyingSquid's moderation. I don't know why that is, although I have a theory that because they are generally on point about moderating certain types of toxic individuals, there's a whisper campaign by certain toxic individuals trying to paint them as some particular type of bad moderator even if the facts don't support it.
It's not even all that hard to misconstrue some event that happened into some huge malicious deal that it isn't, as you just discovered.
Yes, absolutely. If you support all your claims with good sources, maintain a civil demeanour, and clearly hold the superior argument he will go through your entire history to find something, anything, to justify action no matter how irrelevant or ancient the reason.
Can you give an example?
If you're that interested just go through his comment history. He's not shy about doing the same in his comments. Usually it is just a thinly veiled threat.
Edit: Found a good example
What you're saying sounds to me a bit like one can break community rules if mods won't notice right away. If community rules were broken, I don't think it matters much if it happened right now or earlier. Besides, I would also expect that someone breaking the rules will not argue in good faith.
So, to me this example doesn't prove what you imply.
That's not really handing out a ban, though. That was my question on "taking action" about it. Talking in comments is different.
I'm curious to see if this is in response to him "losing" the argument, or if it's in response to someone being personally hostile to him, and him pointing out that if they're doing that to other people they may get moderated for it. Most of what I've been seeing that is summarized as the first thing is actually the second thing.
I'm not sure if they actually have. I know they've publicly called people out for reports which isn't great, and have made threats based on reporting content multiple times, something that isn't possible in lemmy, the content in question at the time was spam.
Yeah, that's the one un-called for message I talked about. It's not ideal but everyone swears there are all these examples of FlyingSquid doing much worse, and then if I ask for examples, it's either that one message, backpedaling from the earlier claims, or else it's something that when I look at it is a wild mischaracterization of something perfectly reasonable.
Can you show me some examples?
Fair enough. I think I can just search for the following you around behavior you described, and take a look at it and see how it seems to me.
Not that I’m doubting you necessarily, but there is some pretty wild revisionist history in these comments, all of it not matching the evidence on examination and all of it pointing to exactly the same conclusion, which is pretty weird. So I’d like to look for myself.
That's a funny way of spelling "I don't have any examples."
Guy never admits he's wrong, ever. And I love the fact that he's married with a kid and seems to be online 24/7.
And they're arguably wrong a LOT. Not only that but everything is always black and white with them, there is no grey area or different perspectives possible.
As a rule, strong feelings about issues do not emerge from deep understanding.
Yeah. I haven't seen FS abuse his power, but man he will just be clearly in the wrong side of an argument and refuse to admit it. Not somebody I enjoy having a debate with, but he keeps his personal disagreements separate from his mod role, and I respect that.
I think he's partially disabled or something, which is how he has so much free time. I feel like he's said something like that, or that he has some kind of chronic condition.
Which is no excuse for having shit netizen behavior.
Yeah, my interactions with FlyingSquid have been fine, but then again, I've never interacted with them in their mod role.
I'm against the genocide in Palestine, and sometimes comment that way.
From what I've seen FlyingSquid tends to be quite fair when moderating, doesn't abuse the mod tools and is quite respectful and civil outside of the mod role. On occasion I've had disagreements and civil arguments with squid, and not once has the hammer been used as a conversation-ending argument.
Jordan however....
I've asked people over and over for a single example of FlyingSquid doing this. Only one person has responded, and that was with an "example" where neither the argument with FlyingSquid nor FlyingSquid being the one that banned them was truthful. This is one of the reasons I think this is a deliberate attempt to start destructive rumors about him.
Edit: Someone else has now given an example. They had said that someone was, among other things, a "fucking shitwit," "self righteous piece of subhuman filth," "a fucking idiot," "fucking brain dead," "your argument is stupid and you deserve what the republicans are gonna do to you," and that they "hope it’s painful and prolonged." Then they got a three day ban, and then said the ban was a way for FlyingSquid to wield his mod powers to "win" the argument against their clearly superior position.
There's a firmly held belief by a certain segment of the community that everyone on Lemmy is liberals who will ban you if you are anti-genocide. Everyone on Lemmy is anti-genocide. Complaining that it's full of these liberals and pro-genocide people is just a way to do some aggrieved whining whenever someone is disagreeing with some total nonsense. "We need to hate on Biden because genocide" "Yes but Trump is ten times worse" "Oh I see, you're one of those pro-genocide people trying to censor me" is roughly how it goes.
Most people are anti-genocide. I think many people do not agree on what genocide is. There's a large segment of people who believe Israel is in a perpetual existential crisis, surrounded by countries full of people who think Israel shouldn't exist and that pretty much goes for Jews in general; and that Israel is merely defending itself. Personally, while I do agree that Israel is surrounded by a lot of people who don't think it should exist, I also believe this does not justify their (collective) behaviors: the settlements, and the genocide in Palestinian.
So the person you replied to was, I think, saying that most people oppose Genocide, many disagree on whether what Israel is doing is genocide, and a few would like to see some ethnic and/or cultural groups entirely eradicated. I agree with GP that the last group is relatively small.
Maybe I should have said "99%", I have seen some overtly pro-Israel users. They're pretty few and far between, though. The vast majority of the time, it's someone using a lazy strawman to attack someone by pretending they like genocide, instead of dealing directly with what they're saying.
Can you link me to some examples of defense of genocide? I can pretty much guarantee you that whatever example you send me is not going to be a defense of genocide, it's just going to be some opinion you disagree with which you are pretending implies support for genocide, so you don't have to engage with what it actually says.
You messaged me, man. There wasn't benefit for you in typing up your opinion in the first place, either. If you're willing to spend time yelling about how it is, but not willing to demonstrate how it actually is when asked questions about it, then I'm going to draw the obvious conclusion.
They definitely will abuse it randomly. I know they're going through lots of shit but damn they have a very hair trigger
Do you have an example of this?
Lemmy.World mods are extremely Zionist and frequently ban users for saying anything remotely pro Palestinian or making a claim about Israel without evidence.
Saying 20.000 killed Palestinians were Hamas without evidence to justify the genocide however, is totally fine.
A very open Zionist "gedeliyah" got promoted to mod on their news community.
Imagine being a regular person with no dog in this race personally and still going yeah, genocide seems good.
I just checked. It was two days ago, but the story about Amnesty International declaring it a genocide is still on the second page of results on ![email protected], and the very top story on ![email protected] after a series of ones about the United shooting is about Israel killing an American family right after the US government told them where they were so they could avoid killing them.
If the lemmy.world mods are banning people for saying anything remotely pro-Palestinian, they must be busy with something else right now. Are you sure that someone wasn't calling for Israeli civilians to be killed, or something, and got banned for that? Because that might seem similar, to someone with a particular type of mindset, but it's not the same thing, and pretending it's that first thing when it's the second is dishonest.
You assume they have no dog in the race.
It's the most likely option. Unless your conspiratorial but I try not to be
Do you have any example of this ?
He constantly brings up Hamas at every thread about Israel committing crimes and never condemns the IDF. The both sidesing is way too obvious.
Alright, found this post: https://lemmy.world/post/21895613
That is one good example but still pretty milquetoast. I'm talking full on articles about Israel openly calling for genocide and that mod barges in with the 'actually there are a few bad apples in Israel but that genocide thing is really what Hamas to do to Israel.'
And after doing that for a few months that the LemmyWorld team decided "yeah this guy has what it takes to become a mod here".
Their modlog has several examples as well.
If you have any link, feel free to share
Here you go https://lemmy.sdf.org/comment/14127174
They fully admit it and say it's okay they are one because it brings balance to the news mod team.
Again, is there a link?
I'm not pro or against them, but it's generally easier to use links to posts or comments when discussing this kind of statements
I didn't save the occurances of it.
But this is one I was thinking of
https://lemmy.world/comment/12682712
Thanks
The infamous "they"
???
I've found the news ones even worse
I wish it would be true, maybe there wouldn't be so many terrorist sympathizers on the biggest Lemmy instance in that case
Pallastinian:
That cat also has a right to self defense.
And I'd wager it doesn't have any doubt about it.
I was banned from c/politics by that same mod because of bullshit reasons too. They're a petty tyrant who can't handle anything that might disrupt their echo chamber.
I just stopped activity in all places that mod had power in. I already had issues with news on lw.
Going to migrate instances later.
I feel the separation between staff and user has already been entrenched.
Looking at modlogs, at times the given reasons show to me at least that they, the mods, have grown tired and are now settling on getting rid of potential trouble rather than fixing it.
Experienced can also mean jaded and in that state of mind you no longer care about circumstances, you just want to get shit done so you'll be rid of another stress you don't want to deal with.
Mods also need a timeout. The volunteer excuse can only work for so long. A way has to be found to prevent them from feeling like they're in a deadend job where they're only greeted with hostility. We need a mod relaxation and decompression program.
Moderation is like politics, and inherently attracts the most narcissistic and authoritarian, so it must be decentralized. As in users have to mod 1 comment/post for every n number of comments/posts they post &/or read after they've been active n number of months, but it would need to be done by averaging moderation across a random sample of users; preferencing users who are least bias and more trusted over time (but without growing dependent on them or their own safe spaces). I'd be happy to mod if it were an occasional part of participation, but I don't want to mod everything, or it to be expected of me when I'm busy with life, or to do it permanently.
FYI Lemmy will ultimately fail because the lead dev is a pathetic despot tankie manchild, as bad as the worst mods on reddit. He created Lemmy to admin ml as his own safe space. He will never give up the power it's given him. It will need to be forked to solve the core problems.
Fork it and move on.
MLs and not giving up power, name a more perfect duo
Nice idea. Mods are hard to find indeed, and this system could help
So excluding people due to a potential: innocent mistake, minor lack of knowledge, language difference (as simple as UK vs US English, and or different spelling from a different language you might speak. Either way, if you look it up, the spelling you used is not uncommon, it's even used in some MSM reports and documentaries), learning and or one of many other disabilities, shit device.
And they say we create echo chambers when we want to get away from such bullshit.
https://medium.com/no-prescription-needed/grammar-the-worlds-most-under-recognized-social-construct-a54e096ecc9c
The fancy name for that is "linguistic prejudice". It's as old as language, and deeply ingrained in human societies, and it's typically subconscious - like, you don't even know why you don't like a certain feature, until you try to find which groups use it.
With that said, if I saw someone spell "palastinian" I'd expect the person to be an English monolingual. Native speakers tend to remember words by their spoken form (non-native ones often do it by the written form), and /ə/ can be represented by ⟨a⟩ or ⟨e⟩ there anyway.
I love the link by the way. Good example of the issue.
wtf is it with lemmy world mods. you think this is reddit? do you want your instance to be an echo champer or want users to just leave and join another?
Clearly you are faking your outrage if you can't spell "chamber". You're rumbled. Banned for trolling.
Lemmy.World so federated it is ran by the feds.
Yes that is exactly what they want sadly
jordanlund's modding is very questionable.
does he know how to mod or he is just doing based on his feelz?
Not surprised, Jordan is one of the fucking worst. If not number one at least number two worst mod on all of Lemmy.
Lemmy has become Reddit
I got perma banned from reddit for telling pedophiles in the doctor disrespect community that regardless of legality, fucking a 16 year old makes you a scumbag. Funny that.
I was banned by an admin for asking a mod why I was banned.
I got permabanned once for saying the pedophile lead singer of Lostprophets deserves to die in the least humane way possible, I appealed by saying "Google his name and tell me you don't agree", 3 days later I got my account back.
The admins may be massive assholes with no lives, but they do have some form of basic morals.
The dude was one of the vilest forms of pedos and I stand by my statement, that dude deserves to die a slow and horrible death that breaks the Geneva convention.
Some places have become like reddit. The saving grace is it never all will. The joy of federation is you can always leave the places they control.
with 4chan mixed in
Are we really bringing back the "Ban you for coughing" nonsense from Reddit?
Yes.
Fother Mucker!
As usual, for alternative communities
This might be the worst one I've seen on here.
Edit: Also, this is why trolling shouldn't be against the rules... it's way too subjective and always ends up getting abused by shitty mods. I get that people don't like trolling but it's better to be specific and ban the obnoxious things trolls do instead of trying to speculate about their state of mind.
Hmm, yeah i thought trolling is specific enough but after some thought it could mean prank(in a good way) or deliberately provoke with inflammatory statement without the intention of debate. So i agree.
I couldn't agree more with this.
The difference between a troll and a genuine poster is intention - but nobody knows someone else's intentions. And mods should not act based on what they don't know.
I have said it multiple times (many times removed) but Jordanlund and Flyingsquid are Jewish Supremacists that are pro-Israel in everything but name. They will show up to anything remotely Israel to defend Israel while saying they aren’t for Israel.
It's a systematic problem. The large LW communities have a stranglehold that prevents new ones from taking hold.
For Lemmy to improve, there needs to be a very easy way to find new communities, particularly on different instances!
Currently there is no way to navigate communities on other instances without a direct keyword search, or by opening a private window to get the link directly from the other server as a logged off user. Clicking the 'Communities' link also needs to default to rising new communities, and not to existing communities.
There also needs to be a major change to the hot/active sorting algorithm to favor small communities with higher engagement % over large ones with higher net upvotes (lower engagement %). The top ten communities should be changing from month to month - otherwise large communities will only get further entrenched and moderation will only get worse.
This is a change that the devs would have to implement. Otherwise dbzer0 or lemmyzip or whatever other server that grows next will just eventually turn into LW and the same problem will repeat.
Does anyone know if these ideas have already been discussed in a closed pull request?
That already exists. It’s called “Scaled,” and it’s way better than the default active sort. Why it isn’t the default, I don’t know.
I just unsubscribed from almost all lemmy world communities and checked scaled and it's actually a decent sort. Before it was just spam and junk. Not sure why it changed so much.
[email protected]
https://lemmyverse.net/communities
I'm lazy but might switch instances. Someone care to link me to an easy how-to? Please and thank you.
Under settings there is "Import/Export Settings" on the right side. It turns your profile settings data (including subscriptions and blocklists) into a json file.
Then you create a login on any other server, go to settings and import the file.
It does not transfer your comments and posts or any other community mod stuff. It is essentially a new account, but with the same user configurable settings.
Thank you!
There are three things that are certain in life: death, taxes and internet moderators being power tripping cucks.
so you're either a tankie or a.... worldist? and what exactly is that, except, not tankie? honest query.
I think they're referring to people on lemmy.world. and one can definitely be neither. Or maybe both.
TY for the insight
lol.. sure kiddo.
you had me until you started typing. if it's worth anything, I don't think you're a tankie, but I think this take is moronic.
Complains about tankies being authoritarian violent people
Advocates for genocide
Make it make sense
To add to it, 90% of the people they call tankies are just leftists who want to learn from the good things that states like USSR and China have done. As if that means they endorse everything they've ever done. However if you try to point out the things America has done such as the multiple genocides we participated in, dictators we propped up, and so on, then that doesn't count towards them being... What do you call an American liberal tankie? Sherman's?
I would call them what they are, liberal bootlickers or ShitLibs
Its funny that you call lemmy.world users worldists while being on lemmings.world
What a smug shit.
I feel like if you're still participating in politics@LW, that's on you at this point.
I was recently site wide banned for 30 days for something I said on LW so I blocked the entire instance. I wish this was just an LW issue but it feels like I have to walk carefully around glass. Ultimately what I said was wrong, but it's not a good look.
It was a three-day temp ban, in response to:
I don't think it was the part about ad hominem that led to the ban.
It's actually been really interesting reading how people summarize the interactions they had with moderators, and then looking at what actually happened, to see the parts they left out of the summary, and the stuff they put in the summary that wasn't there.
The people who attract moderator attention sometimes also tend to argue in bad faith and engage in personal attacks. Who knew.
The mod was clearly entertained by the first one and lauded it a little bit when they removed it, lol.
pls do me im genuinely curious
Ha. Your post seemed perfectly fine, and the heavy-handed censorship of your discussion about moderation is a perfect example of why some people don't have the right temperament for moderation.
Jordanlund bans are very different from FlyingSquid bans. I realize jordanlund was the one who temp banned the parent comment, but mostly I was defending FlyingSquid here, in general. The disparity between "wild personal attacks and wishing suffering on other users = short temp ban" and "question the moderators = permaban from multiple big communities" is exactly a perfect example.
ahaha thanks for your analysis and insight
FlyingSquid actually bans people? Color me surprised
Flyingsquid likes to get other mods to ban people via the .world moderation discord server.
You shills need to calm the fuck down if you ever want to actually influence the general populace.
Oh shit, son. Stop, drop, and roll 🤣🤌🏽🚒👨🏽🚒
If you bring up anything remotely political you're absolutely going to get banned
I was banned from globalnews (or similar) for saying that killing civilians qwas bad even when Hamas did it. I was banned for being a 'genocide supporter'
And then I was banned from every single lemmy.ml community I was in (signal, fairphone, fdroid etc) for talking about the uyguhr genocide
So yeah, I should probably see this as a chance to quit social media completely and go touch grass
ptb
When you read this thread, pay attention to how "PhillipTheBucket" runs defense for LW mods. It's subtle and gross. Constantly asking for examples and arguing in bad faith.
There are two types of logic.
and
I don't know why you're accusing me of operating on the first logic, like it's a bad thing, but you do you.
Asking for examples is not bad faith.
When people ask me for example where LW mods were ignoring feedback on the MBFC bot, I have this thread: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/29791336
I was banned by feminists for linking credible sources that the supposed suffragetes were Terrorists (It's on Wikipedia)
The point is I did my due diligence & posted sources & boy these were some vile people I tell you
Now hold on, dont come trying to gain some kinda solidarity with your anti woman ass on my post. Shoo. Begone.
Want sources buddy you sexist snob ? Oh wait you don't care about facts don't ya
Git. Git on now. Shoo. Git
"Supposed"? Claiming the "suffragettes were terrorists" when < 1% were involved is just plain wrong. With blanket statements like that you sound like a fascist propagandist, and your ban was justified. Thanks for sending me down that rabbit hole though.
Context is key. It looks like the suffragettes had been peacefully protesting for decades before a very small number resorted to militancy, and the result of their "terrorism" was minuscule — 4 deaths and 24 injuries total in 2 years — before they gave it up entirely when WW1 broke out.
Remember! To the monarchs, revolution was "terrorism". I'd never advocate for harming civilians, but "those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.'
Also western governments historically — especially the criminals in 3 letter agency secret police — have constantly used terrorism to advance their own political, economic, and military agendas around the world. They only decry terrorism when doing so is politically or financially advantageous, like lying about WMD's in Iraq to transfer trillions to their crony psychopaths in the MIC. Israel literally detonated thousands of pagers recently in a premeditated act of terrorism, but they're the "goodies" so the incidental murder of civilians is justified (/s #psychotic). The US drone program around the world IS terrorism too.
Authoritarians will never be overthrown peacefully, and all governments will always declare any insurgency terrorism; even when the insurgents have exhausted all other options and are explicitly targeting military. Hell, even Putin likely used the FSB to stage false flag terrorist attacks and seize power.
Suuuuuure
A masterful retort.
Surely this shall be recorded in the annals of history alongside other such historical zingers as "I know you are but that am i ?" or the seminal classic "Your Mother".
They were no freedom fighters buddy, but please keep indulging in your fantasy
If bombing churches is freedom to you then I hate to see you define what's the opposite
Nobody tell this guy about John Brown
Nobody tell this guy about r/RICfetish & r/Circumstraint
The world was really swell when I used to trust wikipedia as an unbiased source for any information that is even a glancingly, remotely political subject
Did you link this excellent article about suffragettes who learned jujitsu and used it to defend themselves against cops and chauvanists while protesting for women's right to vote? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffrajitsu
Waow
.*°(Based based based based based based)
"where is the palestinian right to selfdefense" is dumb enough for a ban. fuck hamas, herzbüllah and the other terror proxies. and those who did not fight them are collaborators.
remember this: there are 9 ppl at a table and then a nazi joins. no one walks away? bam, 10 nazis.
Remind me not to sit at the table with you then.
Wait so in your view, the Nazis are Hamas? Israel is literally carrying out Liebenstraum. I in no way support radical Islamists, but Israel has historically supported Hamas over more moderate or secular political groups like the PLO. This is in line with the larger imperialist tendency to support radical islamists in middle eastern conflicts, such as the Mujahideen, a group that makes Al Qaida and Hamas look like boy scouts, with the aim of further destabilizing the region in order to secure mineral and oil rights for private interests. Palestine's most popular secular political leadwr, Marwan Barghouti, rots in an Israeli prison on made up charges subjected to constant torture since 10/7. This is what happened to the secular popular elements in Palestine, Israel terrorizs them! Israel terrorizes Palestine for 70 years, they created terrorists. This is obviously sad for regular Israelis, but especially Palestinians.
But come on. It's a genocide against civilians. You might as well blame Santa Claus if condemning Hamas, if you won't condemn the Israeli government that carries out these atrocities, as well as imperialism that perpetuates it and makes sure the right people benefit from the mass killing.
Hell, the IDF probably killed more Israelis on 10/7 than Hamas did. Where's your condemnation for them?
That's a funny thing to say about a people facing a genocide. Last I checked it wasn't the Nazis who were victims of apartheid and genocide but the ones doing those things. Like Israel. Have you no soul or have you simply not seen what Israel is doing? Would you like to read amnesty's report on why it's a genocide?
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/12/amnesty-international-concludes-israel-is-committing-genocide-against-palestinians-in-gaza/
Ah but let us see what string of conspiracys you come up with to say amnesty is Hamas actually.
If you don't like Hamas, you must really dislike the guys who fund them:
https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/