It's not fun interacting with them when they often want to engage in ad hominems. This is why I have no interest in the tankie triad.
this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2025
315 points (90.7% liked)
MeanwhileOnGrad
1934 readers
39 users here now
"Oh, this is calamity! Calamity! Oh no, he's on the floor!"
Welcome to MoG!
Meanwhile On Grad
Documenting hate speech, conspiracy theories, apologia/revisionism, and general tankie behaviour across the fediverse. Memes are welcome!
What is a Tankie?
Alternatively, a detailed blog post about Tankies.
(caution of biased source)
Basic Rules:
Sh.itjust.works Instance rules apply! If you are from other instances, please be mindful of the rules. — Basically, don't be a dick.
Hate-Speech — You should be familiar with this one already; practically all instances have the same rules on hate speech.
Apologia — (Using the Modern terminology for Apologia) No Defending, Denying, Justifying, Bolstering, or Differentiating authoritarian acts or endeavours, whether be a Pro-CCP viewpoint, Stalinism, Islamic Terrorism or any variation of Tankie Ideology.
Revisionism — No downplaying or denying atrocities past and present. Calling Tankies shills, foreign/federal agents, or bots also falls under this rule. Extremists exist. They are real. Do not call them shills or fake users as it handwaves their extremism.
Tankies can explain their views but may be criticised or attacked for them. Any slight infraction on the rules above will immediately earn a warning and possibly a ban.
Off-topic Discussion — Do not discuss unrelated topics to the point of derailing the thread. Stay focused on the direct content of the post as opposed to arguing.
You'll be warned if you're violating the instance and community rules. Continuing poor behaviour after being warned will result in a ban or removal of your comments. Bans typically only last 24 hours, but each subsequent infraction will double the amount. Depending on the content, the ban time may be increased. You may request an unban at any time.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
At least the drag and PugJesus issues are related, as that's why PJ got banned on Blahaj: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/39039162
I pointed this out to you in the !fediverselore@lemmy.ca thread and you acknowledged it: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/49571446/20253309
Not sure why you're saying it's coming out of nowhere when you are aware of that link.
People aren't following you around, they reply to comments you make about the whole situation
The "anti-AI troll" come up due to this comment: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/49571446/20270123
Here's PJ's response as they're banned from dbzero atm: https://feddit.uk/post/33315963/18929221
I had a quick look
I'm not going to go that route again
You have repeatedly said this despite the fact that I had nothing to do with moving the 196 comm. I don't know why the fuck you keep spreading this lie despite the fact that I've corrected you on it several times already.
Commenting from this account as I couldn't see you from my dbzer0 one
I have corrected this in the meantime as you probably know: https://lemmy.world/post/33461561/18437409
I didn't say the issues were unrelated, I just said the stupidest Lemmy argument (among some stiff competition) was back and getting debated to death again for some fuckin' reason, along with some other stupid arguments. What the fuckin' reason was wasn't part of what I was trying to say.
@eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com became very upset that an admin (he kept emphasizing that, like I need to treat someone different because they're an admin, IDK, bow and scrape? It was nothing related to admin duties, they were just weighing in in a massive whiny slapfight (on both sides)) had replied to my comment and I hadn't responded to them. One, two. I explained myself, they didn't like the explanation, and they started jumping into among other places a 4-day-old thread to try to continue the argument.
Like I said in that reply, I saw absolutely no point in getting in a new slapfight about it, told them so, and they really didn't like that explanation and tried to start the slapfight anyway in multiple threads (sort of accusing me of doing something wrong by not wanting to? IDK, it's weird, check it out.)
Anyway, that's weird, following me into random additional old threads to try to continue the argument I'd already explicitly told them I wasn't interested in is what I referred to as "following me around."
I've been following things from afar.
People who use "New comments" are going to see new comments posted, whatever old the threads are. I use that filter, and I regularly comment on weeks old threads to reply to someone.
Eugene's comments on the 4-days old thread came up when you mentioned that UM was involved (whey they were not, and you know I'm not a fan of UM), and it was made by another user: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/49344640/20291854
The context is
If you accuse an instance of power tripping, be ready to answer when they reply, otherwise it just seems to be arguing in bad faith.
Reply to them on the same topic you've been talking with them about in some other thread, which they told you they weren't interested in discussing further, angry that they're not giving you responses you think you deserve back in the original thread? If so, I think you should stop doing that, however it is that you're finding their messages in other threads.
I mean maybe that's fair. The whole message was so hostile and dishonest that I couldn't really see any point to giving a reply though. Also, like I said at the time, PugJesus already gave a pretty detailed reply that more or less mirrored what I would want to say about it (which Unruffled of course did not respond to.) Also, I'd already covered my POV on it to death in other comments by that point.
Excerpts of the message I didn't reply to:
What the fuck am I supposed to do with that stuff lol
When db0 came in here and talked about the exact same issue, but in a non-frothing manner, I had a normal conversation with them. I don't agree with the points they raised, and they presumably think I'm wrong as hell, but it's fine, we can just talk. Because they didn't accuse me of protecting any sexual predators or call anyone cock suckers, we got to hash it out, which is how it's supposed to work. I did the same with Ada over in that thread; I don't agree with her but I told her directly what the issue I was trying to communicate was, and we got to talk about it, there's no particular bad blood (at least not from my side), it's just a conversation.
I don't feel though like I need to engage in every conversation no matter what kind of unhinged nonsense is coming at me from the other side, or how low the probability of it ever going anywhere, whatever little badge is attached to the person's username.
Nobody on dbzer0 saw that reply, and even less could respond to it as he's banned from the instance.
Maybe that's the piece missing to solve that matter.
Sounds like a dbzer0 problem. I have a longstanding belief that, if you go out of your way to silence somebody, you don't then get to complain that you can't hear what they have to say.
I went through that thread on LW, PJ didn't really make that much of a good case for himself
https://lemmy.world/post/33338615/18423417
He wasn't silenced, he was banned for targeted harassment of users.
@HikingVet@lemmy.ca clarify please