I apparently got shadow banned almost a year ago from blahaj, for a comment I made on lemmy.world
For the record I was posting in support of inclusive language, but pointing out that context and convention matter.
They seem to have even scrubbed my comment from their instance, lol.
458
Comments257
Blahaj mods (especially the one modding ghazi, transgender and 196) are the worst kind of mods. They promote blatant misinformation, remove posts calling said misinformation out, and they ban people and label them transphobes despite there being no transphobic words or implications whatsoever in your comments.
Just block the entire instance and move on. There are better instances that better represent the lgbt community.
Source: my ban message is the same as yours, and I have never said or implied anything remotely transphobic.
What I hate about blocking instances is that I no longer seem to get inbox notifications when a member of the instance comments on something in response to me, outside of that instance.
Like, my beef isn't with blahaj users, and I don't want to unintentionally ignore them because their admin/s are nutballs.
Unless it’s hexbear in which case the users are also nuts
I can tell you that a lot of the blahaj users hold the same mentality.
What are the better instances?
There isn't (Although Lemmy.World & programming.dev are)
How do you see why you were banned from a page? I was banned from 196 too and I have absolutely no idea what I could have said.
They named their instance after an IKEA product so I can only assume it's a group of trans capitalists who fawn over corporations
The mod to user ratio in some of the communities is way out of whack. Just start with one mod who does nothing except manage spam and actual harmful content posted explicitly to be harmful. If the community ever grows so much that more mods are required, add only as needed and not more. And do the absolute minimum to make the community a good place to be, so it has a chance to grow and flourish.
What I'm saying is mod in moderation.
Wait til they find out you once gave a Like to someone who once posted a questionable tweet!
This should open up an opportunity for people who don't support mod abuse to create communities that don't enable it.
From the Book of the Dude, the holy book of the Dudeism religion:
So what you're saying is that ban is religious discrimination?
I don't want to be called dude or dudette, but I'm 95% certain this will change whenever I finally watch that movie.
Wouldn't be a leftist platform if they didn't spend the majority of their time and effort self policing based on their purity tests instead of doing something actually productive
The People's Front of Judea vs the Judean People's Front!
I still remember watching that socialist convention that spent an hour doing nothing but teaching people to wave their hands in the air to signal applause and running someone down that dared to use the word "guys". Point of Personal Privilege, my ass.
Dude is gender neutral
I'm a dude, he's a dude, she's a dude, we're all dudes, yea!
How many dudes have you fucked?
Only the homies.
I call my wife dude all the time so at least one.
I lost count
Not to everyone, and that's cool, until someone tells you not to call them dude anymore. Then your an asshole if you try to argue the gender neutrality of the term dude. Such as telling someone to get over it.
That's like anything. If my name is Abigail and I don't wanna be called Abby, I don't have to hear an excuse as to why you wanna call me Abby. If someone isn't comfortable being called a thing and they tell you so, you fucking abide by that. Everything else is weirdo behavior.
Using "dudes" as a common noun, is different from using "dude" as a vocative, apples to oranges my dude
So is bitch, but if you ask someone to stop calling you bitch and they tell you to get over it, then they're assholes.
That's because bitch is an insult
Insult is very subjective. I have friends that call me and I call bitch all the time.
You're arguing that the context is subjective to the word provided yes? Yet your example is also subjective, clearly when your friends call you bitch it's not meant as an insult. I can't think of a single instance in which using dude as an insult is going to get someone offended on purpose, where bitch definitely can be used purposefully.
Dude can be used as an insult when used to refer to someone who specifically said they don't want to be called dude. I don't know why this is so hard for you. If people don't want to be called something, don't call them that. Definitely don't tell them it's their fault if they're offended and they need to get over it.
Yeah that's not how language works, that's how pestering works, just because you don't like to be called Apple and I call you an apple doesn't mean that apple is now magically an insult word.
I don't know why this is so hard for you
Nope. That's exactly how language works. You seem to be confused.
Big stretch there bud.
Have lots of friends that calm me bitch. They can do so because I'm fine with it. If I tell them I'm not and they reply with "get over it", we have a problem.
I don't ban people in real life. I would definitely cut them off. Why are you trying to normalize abuse?
Have you tried banning people in real life?
Cuntycunt
This community only has one rule so far: if you're gonna troll, it had better be clever and entertaining. Make of that what you will.
Wow. That is about the tamest comment that’s ever gotten someone banned.
I've seen worse for just for putting criticism in threads asking for user's "questions, concerns, requests and issues". And at the admin level, in a major instance where they never really apologized or corrected themselves until a couple of months later without really assuming any blame.
I'm just glad I'm not the only one who views dude as androgynous.
I thought I was one of the few.
Dude and cunt applies to all genders.
And DINGUS.
I find it androgynous and will use it for anyone, but if anyone told me they were uncomfortable with me referring to them that way, I would stop, as with anything. It’s simply decent to refer to people as they prefer.
Contextually gendered
I find these always interesting to read in the following sentence: 'I fucked a bunch of dudes'.
Do you also believe that this sentence would work for you? (Assuming you are a heterosexual)
Because I always thought I was in the 'Dude is androgynous' camp, but after considering that sentence: I don't think so anymore
Conflation due to context?
I think sexual activity adds implied gender relationships that shift how 'dude' is interpreted. While 'dude' can feel androgynous in casual contexts, in a phrase like 'fucked a bunch of dudes,' the sexual framing amplifies its masculine connotations. This shows how cultural norms around sexuality and gender can override attempts at neutrality.
Most of the women I’ve fucked have been dudes.
A few weren’t.
It's male-leaning, although it gets used androgynously.
If someone personally didn't want to be called dude, I'd avoid it. Otherwise it's not worth freaking out over.
I was once told my choice of defaulting to referring to people as they/them is offensive to nonbinary people. I don't necessarily know your pronouns at that particular instance of time when speaking, and being offensive is not my intention, but it seems to happen anyway.
Which is why I call they/them the equal oppurtunity offender. It doesn't discriminate in its neutralness.
Wait until they hear what non-binary sounds like in Spanish, a language that genders every noun as either male or female.
At least from one Non Binary, I default they/them and have no idea why I personally would find it offensive.
I usually get a lot of hate when I call it "binary thinking" to see only two extreme polar opposite sides to any issue. Some people don't relate to that term outside of gender issues.
They/them is extremely practical and I've yet to meet a non-binary person in real life who complains about the umbrella usage of it. Some people just want to be offended or want to police behaviour. They should stay on twitter.
What the hell? I call everyone they these days as to not offend anyone, I’m trying to be inclusive with this.
Once it's cheap enough, I will unironically just pay for Gemmini or something to monitor my comments and keep track of all the rules. I can't possibly deal with all the nuances and expectations of every instance.
If someone is still offended after that, idk what to say.
Just don't care if you get banned other than to whine about it in whine subs.
Nope, everything is either lo (masculine "the") or la (feminine "the"), and there is no "the" which is gender neutral.
Yeah, when saying things like "this" or "that" there is a neutral version used only and very explicitly for objects when you're not using the actual noun for the object - i.e. in "give me that" but not in "give me that box" - but that's about as close as the thing gets to having a neutral gender.
Same with Portuguese, Italian, French and, as far as I know, all Romance languages out there.
Funny bit is that whilst for most things the same thing tends to be have a noun which is masculine or feminine in all of those languages (at least the ones I know, so no idea about Romanian), some words might be masculine in one language and feminine in another or vice-versa.
That’s why some people push the Latinx crap. If you ever want to make a Hispanic person mad, call them Latinx.
But we're OK with both, and we do use both occasionally. We even used the @ in the 90s-00s until it fell out of fashion as in Latin@.
It's usually only a problem when Americans discuss it amongst yourselves and start blaming each other about who did what, which then polarizes the conversation further for everyone else, especially other Latinos who wouldn't have felt encroached otherwise. Because to us, in the vacuum of ignorance, it's just another whimsy feature of the language.
That's not quite true anymore. A lot of progressives have been adopting it and it's quite common to see in Spanish lingo, especially in gay and feminist circles, whether tongue-in-cheek or otherwise because it is a viable way of writing incusivity in some way.
Here's a picture of a published book by one of my acquaintances who's both feminist and queer:
How do you pronounce that?
The very premise of your question is ableist
How so?
They could not in fact get over it, dude.
They must feel very strongly about the word dude. I'm in your camp on it. It's an exclamation, nothing more 🤷
Sweet
"Using the power of the Continuum Transfunctioner, we will now banish you to Hoboken New Jersey."
The key is that you said "but..." which in some communities fails the test of absolute 100% agreement and makes you The Enemy. I had a very similar experience there, in my case it was saying someone who is "uncomfortable" with gender issues might not actually "hate" anybody, they could just be having trouble overcoming how they were raised. But in the end it's like if a TV channel stops but you get thousands of other channels, so oh well .
Joke’s on them, I’ve shadow banned them.
Lol
Consider the source of the action(a person pursuing a position of authority on a relatively miniscule network) and keep on keeping on. Decades of forums moderated by basement dwellers with a Napoleon complex have made it hard for me to take things like this seriously.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SmAOBbUiZcY
Wow, somebody that day was salty, and pretty much just looking for a comment to get mad about.
There's another FOSS project idea: a bot that detects Lemmy bans and sends you a notification about it.
Another idea, take the mod log and allow voting on mod actions in a way that makes unpopular ones more visible. Give the users tools to evaluate moderators and admins to speed up the process of removing bad mods or users discovering they shouldn't bother with an instance with bad admins. Or, with a different sorting method, it could highlight mods that aren't power tripping losers.
Maybe a similar system for reporting, since it wouldn't surprise me if some mods feel like they need to act because of pressure from losers who power trip with the report button. You know, the kind that feels the need to inform people they've been reported.
well you could just make a lemmy community about spurious bans and people could vote on it, and you could tag them in the comments somewhere….
I love it.
Cheka: Cheka if you're banned or your content is removed.
I don't think there is anything like a shadow ban on Lemmy?
It seems to be an unintentional side effect, that ends up being similar to a shadow ban.
What I mean to say is that I can still make comments on blahaj posts, but they will never show up to users of their instance. So, to me, it seems like everything is okay, when in reality, I've probably been commenting into the ether for 10 mo.
Example:
https://lemmy.sdf.org/comment/16663205
It's not like a shadow ban. It's just a normally instance ban. A shadowban is by definition invisible to to the affected party. This is very much immediately visible through the modlog.
My greater point is that it's dishonest to liken this to a shadow ban due to the secretive connotations of the latter and the way this paints the admins who gave it out
Most users don't habitually check the modlog, let alone of every individual instance they engage with. It has pretty much been invisible to me for the last 10 mo, and I've commented here and there multiple times on blahaj posts in that timeframe, with no immediate indication I had been banned.
Seems to fit the definition to me.
I noticed that you were banned from there a couple of months ago.
How?
I noticed a conspicuous absense of wesker posts, and then reviewed the wesker profile with my computer.
And you check that habitually every day? For every user?
Cmon dude it's not hard to say you were wrong XD
So your argument is that because a modlog entry exists for the ban, nothing else about how it is applied matters? That's a little obtuse imo. I have seen several users claiming not to even know the modlog exists and being thrilled to learn about it. For many users, it's a small link in the footer they never noticed. Users don't get a notification about bans and if the end result is your comments appear to show up for you but not others, that definitely meets the normal definition of a shadowban. Lemmy could introduce some new features(s) to help with that but in the meantime it's absolutely reasonable to see how a user would interpret things this way. I've been on Lemmy over a year and I'm just now finding out this is possible so I wouldn't say it's the fault of the user for not understanding how it works.
Lemmy lacking moderation notifications in the UI or email notification backend doesn't make it a shadowban, if they were absent from the modlog and didn't put the banned flag on your profile then that would be a shadowban. They didn't make an attempt to hide it from you, the communication methods are just very poor right now, there is a reason why Lemmy is on version 0.19.3 or 0.19.8 for the later instances, this is still considered alpha software, it's not finished. The jank is to be expected for a software in its infancy.
CC: @[email protected]
I mean, I was saying what it seems like, not what it is. The user unfriendliness leads to confusion. And yes I understand software takes time, development is what I do for a living. I was just saying it's reasonable to feel like you have been shadowbanned given the circumstances
My point is that that instance admins didn't intend it as a "shadow ban", but as a normal lemmy ban for someone they don't believe deserves a platform towards their instance membership. Therefore insisting on calling it "a shadow ban" when most people understand that term to be something else than an instance ban, is egregious and misleading with the aim of revenge.
Sure, lemmy could introduce notifications, In fact, since the modlogs are public, this could be done by any frontend. But it's still doesn't mean that the admins tried to shadow ban someone.
Well my comment made clear that it wasn't about intent but rather a reasonable interpretation.
In response to your edit, I don't particularly care about how this post paints an admin that would call me a transphobe and instance ban me, over the singular given comment and the context in which it was made.
Any instance admin can ban users who are toxic to their instance member. Calling all these completely normal bans "shadow bans" is disingenuous.
It doesn't matter if this is Lemmy's default behavior. Allowing users to post comments that cannot be viewed by anyone in the receiving community is shadowbanning, regardless of whether Lemmy puts that label on it.
I would argue that's the fault of the frontend not informing the user that they're banned, and not a shadow banning.
That's about the least egregious part of it all, but noted. I'm still going to refer to it as shadow banning, because it makes no difference to me that it's technically a misgiving of the Lemmy platform.
Sure but your argument loses credence and is also confusing since most people have something more egregious and underhanded when talking about shadow bans. You're being deliberately misleading in order to hurt the reputation of said admins more.
Shadow. Banning.
The notion that his comment was "toxic" is objectively ludicrous.
Sorry, but they didn't call that comment toxic. Just that if an admin finds someone to be toxic, which is of course subjective, they can ban them.
In that case the word "toxic" should not have been used, especially in the way it was used "ban users who are toxic to their instance members" (emphasys mine) rather than "ban users who they think are toxic to their instance members", as the former implies that the OP is "toxic" rather than that specific Admin conclude (possibly all by themselves) the OP was toxic.
Even if "toxic" had been used in a way that conveyed the message that in this case a person's "toxicity" was the determination of an Admin (human opinion, rather than some kind of neutral process), I think one of the points that is being made is that for certain Admins, the barrier to ban is a lot lower than "toxic".
Cant see me O_O
How do you know they don't see your comments?
Compare with the thread as it appears on their instance.
https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/20091173
Weird u can see mine. last time I checked, programming.dev had our instance on their block list.
Dbzero has our instance on their block/defederated list, so they can't see my comment.
I have also been banned from specifically 196 for a comment on a completely different instance. Reason: Transphobe. Because I was asking questions.
And it's kind of annoying that when I scroll through the feed, upvote a post and get an error. Oh it's a blahaj post... Sometimes I realize after I've finished writing a comment and can't send it.
196 is really fuckin weird
They have the best memes but the worst mods
This is why I've completely blocked that instance from my feed so i don't have to be disappointed i can't participate
I'm tempted to play survivor and go see how long before my neurotypical ass accidentaly gets banned.
You don't need to go anywhere, apparently, any comment on any instance that federates with blahaj already grants you a participation ticket.
That’s when you start using “Greetings, human beings”
And then your computer starts making angry co-pilot noises
Hey volks.
Greetings loved ones, let's take a journey
That's what makes Lemmy lame honestly
Lemmy is like that snake that feeds on itself. What's it called again? Ouroboros? No the other one, human centipede, that's the one
How is that a lemmy problem? Reddit and such have the exact same issues
Lmao they banned me for saying we shouldn't let trump get elected, the blahaj mods are awful
I randomly fact check "I got banned for something stupid" claims for giggles. Sometimes it's true, often they're lying.
You're lying. Gotta love public modlog.
https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/modlog?page=1&actionType=All&userId=2075497
Thanks for the giggles.
Because I know you people can't read, I'm adding this bit of clarification to the top: saying we should choose A over B doesn't necessarily mean one supports A. I don't want an appendectomy, but if the alternative is dying from appendicitis, it's the better of the two possible options. If I choose not to get an appendectomy, that is the same as choosing to die, even if I delude myself into thinking that if I choose not to decide, I haven't made a choice.
I love public modlogs because people can read them and link to them while also straight up lying about them. Let's take a closer look at what the blahaj mod said.
Well that's weird. I don't think I ever defended genocide. What comments were removed?
I don't see any genocide defense here. Sybil didn't know what an ad hominem attack was, and I was clarifying it. Weird comment to remove, but ok.
I was a bit rude towards the end, but still not seeing the genocide defense.
And that's it. I didn't defend genocide at all, all I said was that we should vote for Biden (it was a different time) because the only possible alternative was Trump, and Trump will make the ongoing genocide worse than Biden would. I would like to congratulate the moderators of blahaj again for successfully preventing a Biden/Harris presidency, ensuring the total annihilation of the Palestinian people. Good job, people of Palestine salute you. Morons.
I got banned from lemmy.world/c/linuxsucks, which is one person's mental illness, so who cares? Doesn't stop me from calling them an idiot when they show up elsewhere.
That user showed up in the thread warning about someone spreading fud about Wikipedia to attack OP. Safe to say, whoever they are, they have multiple accounts for their obsessions.
Linux is the expression of the collective mental illness of thousands of mentally ill computer hobbyists.
I was banned from a community called, "Pleasant Politics," that I had never heard of or interacted with, but honestly, as a preemptive move, fair enough.
Oh that place is an interesting idea but poor execution.
Last I knew they would ban you if you got banned from any of the news comms or had too many controversial comments. Which just boiled down to downvotes
I remember the creator of the bot that does the bans insisted until he was blue in the fact that it doesn't ban based on downvotes while spewing a lot f technobabble that ultimately ammounted to banning for downvotes. So yeah, he's trying to bring back one of the worse features of Reddit, that being an ass kissing requirement, that's what karma requirements are, they are an ass kissing requirement, because the way you get karma points is by kissing ass, the way you lose them is by sharing new or different ideas. See the issue with them? The system punishes people for having ideas that other people don't like, not that are wrong or evil, but that other people simply don't like. That's not even mentioning people who cheat the system by doing vote manipulation to their own comments or to other comments.
This phrase is genius.
I understand the reddit karma requirements, having seen too many small subs get swarmed by x day old but no or only negative karama but yeah that creator didn't seem to want anything polite, just acceptable to status quo thinking
Karma requirements only punish people who have different thoughts and opinions and who are honest enough to not cheat by using bots or upvoting their own comments with alts. It's not a good solution, it punishes people who are honest and don't commit vote manipulation. It's why the Lemmy Devs removed score from the API, it's still possible to get it but it's harder, and more effort since you have to get it from each comment and post and add them up.
Hmm, well, I wasn't banned from anything before that, and none of my comments had been highly downvoted. I had gotten in a few people's faces over genocide denial, though. I assumed it was because of that.
Funny enough, I just double-checked, and it looks like I've recently been banned from a bunch of Dubvee communities, too. I've never heard of this instance before, but based on this post, I'm guessing they didn't like my thoughts on United Healthcare. Again, I wasn't even aware of Dubvee until now, so I can't say it feels like much of a loss.
Apparently I've been banned and unbanned multiple times from that comm. Absolutely no idea even after reading their experiments faq.
Even their examples of bad comments were like 3 downvotes vs 8 up
https://slrpnk.net/post/11069853
From the linked description:
No, no they aren't. Communities have general set of opinions and they will often downvote you having the wrong one even if its as trivial as preferring the "wrong" team in a sporting event.
If I was randomly unbanned without being actually transgressive and I never knew when I could post I would very very shortly stop engaging with a community.
It's worse most comments most places will have near zero engagement. Threads are full of stuff only a few people upvoted it would be easy to use this system to harass and silence people. Hell People look at karma as the communities judgement and are actually more likely to downvote less likely to upvote if an innocuous comment is shortly reduced to -1
Is there a lemmy instance that isn't basically trash?
By far the most obnoxious community on lemmy if you happen to be a mod and need to check the mod logs frequently.
Where would I see if I've been banned somewhere? I usually browse /all so I'm sure I've commented and voted most everywhere.
Go to each instances mod log and search your username
I don't even like IKEA.
I'm gen x dude also has no gender.
i kinda agree but does "i fuck dudes" sound right?
Its your choice.
It depends on the context. The term has generally become more generic, but some contexts can put it back to its original gendered meaning.
dude is masculine in every definition i’ve found (looked it up) except for a city slicker new to a ranch…
i’ve always known it to be gender neutral… but i have a female friend that gets offended every time someone calls her that.
but the fact that it keeps happening means that it’s gender neutral to all of those people too (she’s a fairly feminine female).
that said, it’s best to just call people terms that they are comfortable with, not ones that you’re comfortable calling them.
personally, i find calling a single person they/them a little obtuse, but it’s not really that hard. (slightly confusing when there’s a question of whether im referring to them or a group of people).
Except when it comes to cultural/generational uses of words. Every generation has words they use in a altered way. Dude was one such word when I was young. It was used by my generation in a way that didn't exactly match the definition. Just like all the other generations use words out context with their written definitions. Its why I laugh when the younger generations get mad because they think they invented the concept.
yeah, it’s almost as if language is an evolving thing….
but fuck that noise, i only accept definitions from the 1876 edition of Merrium-Webster… all other usages are wrong.
(i do seriously had when the nounify a verb like “cringe” or making “sus” mean anything at all bad…
How do you check your name in the mod log? I feel as though I've been pretty chill but I'm curious to see if I've stepped on anyone's toes.
Ah, I remember that comment.
Thank you for saving me the trouble.
If you find out let me know too please.
You can scroll down and you would see modlog inside it you can search by user
@[email protected] if you go to the bottom of the page on the default web frontend, there's a link to the modlog and you can search your username.
I have no idea how well federation of modlogs works exactly, though. I usually check on ml to see if I've been banned again on ml (you don't have to be logged in).
I'm apparently banned from some vegan community because I argued against them when they said they're more oppressed than black people in America 😂🤣😂🤣
I think it's really easy to construe "get over it" as dismissive of a marginalized group's concerns. That's how it comes across to me. If it needs context to seem less so, it could probably use better wording.
Stop downvoting this dude, they're not wrong, it's a reasonable take and true in hindsight.
Thanks. I could probably use my own advice, too. That last bit of mine could have been worded better.
Telling someone to get over it is the most inclusive thing you could do. I'm not giving special treatment to you just because you're different bucko.
So would you say to women that they should just get over discrimination and harassment in the workplace because it's inclusive, for example? I'm sure you can think of some more extreme examples that go beyond that both in magnitude and into parts of a person's identity beyond gender.
Please understand that marginalized groups already receive special, negative treatment. Claiming that they're being included by ignoring those very real parts of their lives doesn't sit well with me. If you are the type of friend that ignores the suffering of the people you are close to and treats others well only so far as they are "normal" and don't require special treatment, that won't make a fuss when you call them names or make them the butt of a joke to be "inclusive", then I don't envy the people in your life, bucko.
Not everything is a microagression
Right. Most of the things that are really concerning people are macro. Glass ceilings, police killings of black people, women dying due to abortion bans, assaults on trans people. Not everything can be dismissed as a micro aggression.
This escalated pretty quickly. This is why people don't want to deal with the inclusivity club.
So there are real injustices and acknowledging that is unacceptable? I can't think of a more ignorant take than yours.
You're literally condemning someone for saying a cultural phrase and you want to talk about injustice. Get over it.
Blahaj and beehaw are almost as annoying as the tankies.
They're based asf for that. I've said a lot of things that triggered the tankies on ml and it's just been 2-5 day bans.
How are people even banning someone who never commented on their sub anyway? I tried to do that once in retaliation because I'm a petty bitch but couldn't figure it out.
I assure you, they do permabans
who cares. some of these communities are trash who don't allow you to participate if you don't align with their views. no different than reddit.
fair but I've been banned because I didn't follow the flow of the political narrative of the conversation. I don't consider myself squarely in one camp so I read, understand, and comment/criticize what I feel I want to engage with. I will admit i was auto banned from one instance and got no response from anyone, so I can relate to what your comment is getting at.
How did you verify that?
The modlog confirms the ban, and there's another comment chain on this thread that explores the pseudo-shadowban part.
I didn’t know if the mod log was replicated among instances or not. I was always curious how you’d know if another instance banned you.
I'm so sorry that happened to you.
So much for "inclusivity"
Bro
Yeah. Saying anything that isn't overwhelmingly supportive of transpeople is just asking to be mod abused.
Unfortunate world we live in, but thanks for fighting back.
As a SoCal boi dude is not about gender. It's a vibe
Is there a way to ban users before they comment/post?
Preemptive banning of trolls is something Lemmy could use. I shouldn’t have to wait until they post.
Use the minority report function.
This one is for the individual who reported my content.
Fuck blahaj, All my homies hate blahaj🗣️🔥
Same, was banned for totally trivial reasons like being racist or something like that.
I was just banned there today by their Admin Ada for asking on their new pinned thread about "respecting all neopronouns" if that includes Minor Attracted People who I don't want to share a space with.
Instead of saying "yes we will ban pedophiles who self identify as Minor Attracted People" they just got mad and banned me.
goes into space acting like a troll and attacking the admin of instancr
gets banned
Why would you be surprised for the ban after acting like a troll (ie behaving like a person attacking pronouns use) then attacking admin? All on you buddy.
Note I think Ada would throw under the bus anyone and don't think they're a good admin but this isn't one of those times
I've had to leave like 4 LGBTQ spaces on reddit because the insane mods wanted Minor Attracted People to be accepted and validated.
I'm not interested in contributing to their instance anymore if they can't fucking keep the place clean.
All i asked at first was "this doesn't include Minor Attracted People right?" and they started removing my comments instead of being capable of saying "no we won't allow those people to validate themselves here"
They literally even said it wasn't allowed and you still attacked them. But yeah play victim
Now go find all the ones that were removed with no actual response leading up to that.
Like 4-5 comments for them to do what they could have after the first comment. And they only chose to do it after banning me.
I don't care what power trip someone is on, if they chose to run an organization and reply to legitimate concerns with removing them then I'm going to keep bother them because fuck it either Ill get an answer or find a better community.
Also I'm not a victim, they are just a shitty mod with communication issues and it makes me not want to contribute to their space.
Yeah they banned you after the deletions, probably because you kept attacking those on that instance
And god damn that's a lot of removals on other instances/comms for similar behavior
https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/modlog?page=1&actionType=All&userId=13999020
Anyone using the term "MAP" is a 4chan troll or moron. You're wasting your time engaging with them beyond the block button.
Which is exactly why they should be automatically excluded from safe spaces for people with legitimate genders/sexualities
Mods don't like it when their narrative doesn't perfectly fit. I don't support neoliberals or war so that gets comments removed.
You can see why I didn't like being on .world mods here aren't any different than reddit mods.
I'm not trolling any more than you "troll" against Zionist mods that ban you.
But you're still on world....
The trick is to stay away from the wild and stupid shit on blahaj. First thing to block after Ani.social and all the .ml instances. I have no time for cesspools or bronies.
I assume they removed your comment because of your belief in referring to people according to traditional genders: men and women.
I don't think that warrants removal or even banning though because as you say, you're advocating for inclusive change in language. Perhaps the next step would have been the inclusive change of more genders than men and women, perhaps just "people" and dropping the binary distinction altogether.
Depending on what you were replying to, I could see how that is transphobic. Like if you were replying to someone saying they don't like to be called dude and you end the post with "get over it, dude!"?
You said it yourself. Context matters.
For what it's worth, I've met trans women who dislike the term dude. It might be more common than you think.
Also, after thinking on this more, I feel more confident it has to do with the hypothetical "if you're offended [by me calling you dude], get over it dude" as doubling down on using a term someone doesn't want you to as soon as they've told you not to.
It usually is. If you don't get paid, a bit of arbitrary power is kind of expected.
modding based on contex, don’t be silly.
babe the person you replied to stated that the context of the initial post matters.
no matter the intention, it’s important to consider what the actual impact of the post could’ve been. you just took the piss. my replies to you are reiterating that the context DOES matter, and isn’t just “vibes”.
they clearly weren’t banned for an intent that they only expressed in the post complaining about being banned. i hope you’re being willfully dense, because i can’t help you if you GENUINELY think this bullshit.
Dude, you're a cunt.
A proper geezer.
I just want to report that every downvoter in this thread is an anti-semite and/or a nihilist.
As I solipsist I upvote everything. After all, I made all these comments.
this is your dream after all. go nuts.
Always good to be nice and avoid ticking people off. That way, you won't have to argue whether your ban was fair or not.
I should write a ban survival guide (=
What's the downvotes for?
How come only assholes have issues with these communities?
I don't have an issue with the members of the blahaj community, which is why this is unfortunate.
You seem like you do by telling them to "get over it" when they ask you not to refer to them in a certain way.
My dude, to my knowledge I never even directly interacted with a member of that community in that thread.
You don't need to interact with someone to have a problem with them. You said people offended by the inherent gender of the word "dude" need to get over it. They don't want that in their community, so they banned you.
The fact remains, I personally have no issue with the members of the blahaj community.
Unless they ask you not to call them dudes.
Which never happened.
You fucking cunt
No person can predict, much less accommodate every positive or negative perception of a word. At what point do you simply tell people to "get over it" when they are taking a meaning from something you are unaware of, and do not care about? This guy got banned over the word "dude" and it makes the entire community look overly sensitive. Trans people are just people, like the rest of us, and we all have to deal with so much every single day.
For every single trans person who is offended by calling them "dude", another would be offended that you'd treat them differently by not calling them "dude". This is approaching the same type ridiculousness as people getting angry over "happy holidays" instead of "merry christmas" tbh.
You don't have to predict any kind of positive or negative perception of a word. If you misgender me, I'll tell you "please don't" to which, if you're not an asshole, you'll reply "ok". Replying "Actually, that's a neutral word, so just get over it, mmkay?" is asshole behaviour and that is why he got banned.
Get off your high horse. The whole thread is about how the guy got shadow banned after not even directly calling anybody anything to their face. Nobody asked him to stop, and I'm sure he would have if someone had asked them to, same for me. But if were having a casual conversation and you get annoyed by the word "dude", then I'm probably just going to end up wondering what the hell your problem is because I use "dude" casually all the time.
Nobody banned him because he said "dude". You're only trying to pretend that because you refuse to admit you're wrong. They banned him because he said people who consider the word "dude" to be a gendered term need to "get over it". This is not hard to understand.
He specifically said in another comment that he would stop if asked. If Lemmy users were punished and held responsible for all these random off-comments taken out of context, half of the user base would be in prison right now, and the other half would be on a watch list for some of the shit I've seen people say. Stop choosing to be outraged for the fun of it.
Seriously? The word dudette exists for a reason, use it.
No
most mentally stable lemmy user.
hey, thanks for showing me that i should block you and this community!
I'm so sorry that happened to you.
I'm just trying to figure out what people have a problem with for your statement.
Were you not being inclusive? And 'dude is gender neutral' has been something I've heard since I was a boy, and I'm much older now and no longer a boy, and that's never really bothered me or any of my friends.
Someone else pointed out the "get over it" part might have been abrasive, and I'm inclined to agree I probably shouldn't have included that part.
Primarily because if someone explicitly asked me to not say "dude" to them, I'd oblige because it's really just such an unimportant thing.
I guess what I was trying to convey was if their knee jerk reaction was to be outright offended, that's less my problem and more theirs.
Yeah I'd agree with that. I'll never be rude on purpose, so if my behavior is causing you discomfort please let me know so I can fix it. But if feelings get hurt that fast, it's not something within my realm to control (unless I want to change how I talk within my circles and with my loved ones, and random stranger doesn't meet that bar).
I tried typing up a response, but I feel I don't quite grasp whay you wrote. Can you rewrite it with some additional grammatical structures to separate clauses or just change it around so I can try and understand?
If not, i guess I didn't meet your random internet stranger bar, but I'm hardly having a crisis so maybe it doesn't count for you.
It depends upon who you ask. Some people think it's gender neutral; some don't. If you don't want to offend people, you should ask.
I don't feel like asking random people on the internet I will only interact with once whether or not they support the word dude. If it bothers them, they can inform me and I can apologize. But I guess, in relation to your comment, that would just boil down to me being okay with offending people who are upset if a 'first conversation' involves me using the wrong 'friend' word.
Cry harder
Fucking cunt
So, you got banned somewhere; don't whine about it, get over it.
You whining about this is worse
The irony, it sustains me.
You're not allowed to tell people what they can and can't be hurt by. This whole thread and all it's bad takes are a great example of why trans communities need to be so protective of their already harassed users.
This was a deserved ban.
I was hurt by the ban.
You hurt those in the community. Which is why you were banned.
You went in to a trans space, and told people who did not like to be called dude, to get over it dude. By and large, trans women do not appreciate being called dude. You are within your right to think it's gender neutral, but those that constantly have their gendered denied do not feel the same. You ignored the context of the community you were saying that in.
The fact that even a year later, you are standing by your right to call people dude who do not want it shows how deserved the shadowban was and how little you actually care about "inclusive language".
It was in the Ask Lemmy community on lemmy.world
These unfounded accusations hurt.
Ah, well apologies. I assumed that if a blahaj mod banned you it would be at least on that instance. While I still disagree with your position on dude as gender neutral, as I said before it is your position to hold. I retract everything else.
Water under the bridge.
Like I said in a different comment, I probably didn't need to be so firm with the "get over it" part. I should have omitted that, in hindsight. I was just trying to convey there's no need to go zero to sixty on the offense.
Ok dude
Pick better fights.