this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2025
-8 points (39.5% liked)
Ye Power Trippin' Bastards
1623 readers
45 users here now
This is a community in the spirit of "Am I The Asshole" where people can post their own bans from lemmy or reddit or whatever and get some feedback from others whether the ban was justified or not.
Sometimes one just wants to be able to challenge the arguments some mod made and this could be the place for that.
Posting Guidelines
All posts should follow this basic structure:
- Which mods/admins were being Power Tripping Bastards?
- What sanction did they impose (e.g. community ban, instance ban, removed comment)?
- Provide a screenshot of the relevant modlog entry (don’t de-obfuscate mod names).
- Provide a screenshot and explanation of the cause of the sanction (e.g. the post/comment that was removed, or got you banned).
- Explain why you think its unfair and how you would like the situation to be remedied.
Rules
- Post only about bans or other sanctions that you have received from a mod or admin.
- Don’t use private communications to prove your point. We can’t verify them and they can be faked easily.
- Don’t deobfuscate mod names from the modlog with admin powers.
- Don’t harass mods or brigade comms. Don’t word your posts in a way that would trigger such harassment and brigades.
- Do not downvote posts if you think they deserved it. Use the comment votes (see below) for that.
- You can post about power trippin’ in any social media, not just lemmy. Feel free to post about reddit or a forum etc.
- If you are the accused PTB, while you are welcome to respond, please do so within the relevant post.
Expect to receive feedback about your posts, they might even be negative.
Make sure you follow this instance's code of conduct. In other words we won't allow bellyaching about being sanctioned for hate speech or bigotry.
YTPB matrix channel: For real-time discussions about bastards or to appeal mod actions in YPTB itself.
Some acronyms you might see.
- PTB - Power-Tripping Bastard: The commenter agrees with you this was a PTB mod.
- YDI - You Deserved It: The commenter thinks you deserved that mod action.
- YDM new - You Deserved More: The commenter thinks you got off too lightly.
- BPR - Bait-Provoked Reaction: That mod probably overreacted in charged situation, or due to being baited.
- CLM - Clueless Mod: The mod probably just doesn't understand how their software works.
Relevant comms
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
YDI. If you're for the reunification of your country, maybe contribute something to the discussion and don't just post propaganda ~~memes~~? I mean whether someone is member of the United Nations doesn't really determine their status as a souvereign country. Nor does the opinion of the CCP or USA?! So what's the point?
Only Chinese have to do this?
Everyone has to do this? I mean I'm German... The borders here have changed all the time for centuries. I don't post offensive memes about who should be incorporated into some country... Or ejected from my country. Or whether Ukraine belongs to Russia... Or Venezuela to the USA... Or the West Banks to Israel... That's not really funny once people die because of it.
I don't agree with OP, but this thinking can be used to say Ireland should never get its land back from Britain.
I think someone sharing an IRA-type commentator implying support for the violent takeover of Northern Ireland would receive a similar level of contempt.
I would hope not.
'Successful' colonisation is still colonisation.
So you think someone supporting the hypothetical attack of people in Northern Ireland and promoting it would be a good thing?
The people of Northern Ireland are descendents of descendents of descendents. They have their own devolved government, and I expect that within some election cycles, a pro-Republican majority will hold the Stormont and be able to seriously move to a referendum. In our lifetime.
Calling for violence in light of that reality is repulsive.
I think Ireland should be reunited. Violence is not my first choice, but it is so far the only tool that has gotten us where we are today and I am not privileged enough to condone it.
And what do the people of Northern Ireland want?
What do the people of Crimea and Donbas want?
The people of Crimea may well wish to join (or remain) in Russia. Donbass? Impossible to say. Not as Russian as Crimea.
Was this supposed to be a gotcha?
So you support their reunification with Russia?
Crimea? Via referendum, sure.
I don't really regard the referendums conducted in the occupied regions of Ukraine to be valid at all.
Do you support Taiwan's self-determination?
Looool. "Who cares what the people living there think: I, an enlightened westerner, have decided that they are invalid.
I support Taiwanese peoples right to self determination
Are you going to unironically claim that referendums conducted under military occupation by a well known autocratic regime are going to be genuine?
And if they say "We don't want to be a part of the PRC" would you accept that?
How convenient: any time you don't like the result of a referendum, just declare that it can't be trusted.
Yes: unlike you I wouldn't just declare "well clearly the RoC government just rigged the vote."
Would you accept if they did choose to be part of the PRC?
Not what I asked you: Are you going to unironically claim that referendums conducted under military occupation by a well known autocratic regime are going to be genuine?
The referendums in the Russian occupied regions were not conducted by Ukraine under any kind of neutral parties observation. Many Ukrainians who lived there had outright fled the regions due to the war, and could not vote - moreover, Russia didn't even occupy all of the regions they held these referendums in. Moreover, are you normalising and justifying the idea of a state just invading chunks of land and them legitimising their conquest via dodgy referendums?
Yes.
Damn, crazy how there aren't any referendums from before the Russian invasion. I wonder why not....
Has Taiwan had any referendums conducted by the PRC? Presumably those are the only ones you'd respect.
As opposed to just refusing to hold referendums in the first place?
There also haven't been any referendums in Wallonia to join France. Or Flanders to join the Netherlands. Or Austria to join Germany. What's your point?
No, they haven't. Why would they? The PRC don't control Taiwan. I fail to see how this comparison makes any sense.
Also, is there a particular reason I should have to respect any referendums organised by Russia?
When did the Zap oblast or Kherson demand referendums?
Is Wallonia obliged to hold a referendum to see if they want to join France? Is Russia "refusing" to hold referendums in Dagestan, Bashkortostan?
Ah, I see you've reached the "deliberately playing dumb" stage of bad faith argument.
And Ukraine doesn't control Donbas, yet you said any referendums have to be overseen by them to be legitimate. But again, you're playing dumb here.
Damn, really picking and choosing when it comes to "recognizing the right to self determination"
Whataboutism. We are talking about Donbas, which tried to have referendums, only for Ukraine to declare them illegal.
Ah ok, so you support the right to self determination, unless the ruling power says no, then it's tough luck.
And how is that playing dumb? What's the difference? Would it be justiified for France to notice that Wallonia hasn't held a referendum on joining them, invade and then hold their own referendum there?
But they did (and we are not even just talking about the Donbas here but also Russia controls Kherson and Zap oblast (partially). This would be like if the PRC invaded and occupied Taiwan and then held a referendum. I would also not accept that outcome as valid either.
That's not what I asked you. Is there a reason Russia should be seen as trustworthy when it comes to election outcomes? Would you trust any referendum held by any state on earth yourself?
We are not just talking about the Donbass, as Russia also held referendums in those regions I mentioned. And for that matter though, when did the Donbass-at-large demand referendums prior to Russia invading? The Donetsk/Luhansk Republics only at maximum managed to occupy about 1/4 of the entire region.
Does this surprise you? Would you expect any country to recognise as legal and legitimate referendums to secede conducted by an an invading country on their territory?
How a referendum begins does matter. I obviously don't respect the legitimacy of the 1938 Austrian plebiscite, and I assume neither do you. A referendum held by a revanchist state occupying a region militarily after invading it, driving the old local government out and driving hundreds of thousands of people from their homes is going to be pretty lown down on the list of "valid and fair" referendums that could happen.
That's not an answer to my question. Is Wallonia obliged to hold a referendum to see if they want to join France? Is Russia “refusing” to hold referendums in Dagestan, Bashkortostan?
Is it "tough luck" for Tatarstan by your logic then? Is it "tough luck" for Tibet too?
Because obviously you do actually know what the difference is, and are just trying to waste time.
And now they don't. So why should they still have to be the one overseeing the referendum?
Of course, we've already gathered you pick and choose on this matter.
No, it doesn't surprise me at all. Whether it is "surprising" has zero bearing on the point at hand and you're only bringing it up to waste time and dodge the point.
This is all completely irrelevant nitpicking, and you know it.
Sounds like you don't actually believe in people's right to self determination at all. Here's a question for you: why should the PRC trust any referendum that the RoC does that suggests the people of Taiwan don't want reunification?
Sounds like you only support referendums you agree with the outcomes of. Not to mention you're ignoring the referendums that took place before the Russian invasion.
That was your logic, dumbass. You can't even remember your own claimed position anymore
No, I do not. There's no difference here. The question remains unanswered: What’s the difference? Would it be justiified for France to notice that Wallonia hasn’t held a referendum on joining them, invade and then hold their own referendum there?
Why should a referendum take place at all? Should military conquest be legitimised by sham elections? Why should I trust that Russia would hold a free and fair referendum here?
So all proposed referendums are equal, in your mind? The 1938 Anschluss was completely fair, was it?
You know, you can support the principles of self-determination (and the referendums that usually accompany that) whilst also acknowledging that referendums can also be used by revanchist or expansionist state actors as a tool to legitimise their conquest.
Is it not a reasonable response? Would you not expect a state to reject another country invading and occupying their territory and then trying to legitimise it through a referendum?
And what point am I dodging?
How is this irrelevant, and nitpicking?
How do you determine whether or not an election is rigged or held with severe conduct issues, from your perspective?
Seems to me that given hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians, most of them likely pro-Ukraine had fled Kherson, the Zap Oblast and portions of the Donbass - that any election there would be illegitimate on those grounds. But what about the timescale? Were people openly permitted in those regions to publicly campaign in favour of remaining in Ukraine? Were there any debates?
There's election results and opinion polls over decades in Taiwan that consistently show the people there do not want to "reunify" with the PRC. But above all else, you present your position as unfalsifiable. How do you determine how a people's will should be shown?
You mean the referendums that only took place in 1/4 of the Donbass?
Moreover, when did I say that? I already told you that it's likely that given the demography of Crimea, that they would vote to rejoin Russia. It's less clear in the donbass and given that Russia is hardly a nation that does honest electioneering, I don't really trust the validity of their referendums (nevermind the issues too with an invading power organising the referendum that would legalise their takeover).
So when do you respect self-determination then?
My logic is that a region should decide if it wants to join another country or not, or become independent, and not a neighbouring country that historical grievances over it breaking off. There's an immediate and obvious conflict of interest when a larger neighbour invades and occupies a portion of another country and then immediately holds a hastily designed referendum. Are you implying that every single referendum, no matter how it emerges - the result is automatically above board and should always be respected?
Look, obviously I'm not going to humour this deliberately playing dumb. You know what the difference is.
So, in short, you do not support the right of self determination for the people of Donbas.
Better system than your "referendums are only legitimate if they agree with what I want" perspective.
I have repeatedly told you that the referendum was before the invasion. I can only assume that you pretending otherwise is just another instance of you deliberately wasting time.
For the obvious reasons you're well aware of. If you keep doing this, I'm going to start doing it too, so don't complain about it when I do.
I have repeatedly told you that the referendum was before the invasion. I can only assume that you pretending otherwise is just another instance of you deliberately wasting time.
Ironically though, that means all of your arguments now apply to Ukraine. Hmm, yes, were people permitted to publicly campaign for leaving Ukraine? Oh wait, never mind; Ukraine just declared the whole referendum illegal. Oops
No. That was not your logic. Once again, you can't even remember your own position.
What about the immediate and obvious conflict of interest from the country that controls the region refusing to recognize their desire to leave?
Also, I have repeatedly told you that the referendum was before the invasion. I can only assume that you pretending otherwise is just another instance of you deliberately wasting time.
Better system than your "referendums are only legitimate if they agree with what I want" perspective.
No, I do not. I will not stop. The question remains unanswered: What’s the difference? Would it be justiified for France to notice that Wallonia hasn’t held a referendum on joining them, invade and then hold their own referendum there?
I reject that Russia is credibly representing the self-determination of the people of the Donbas, Zap Oblast or Kherson by holding sham elections in territory they don't even entirely control. What about those who fled those areas?
So you unironicaly believe that someone must believe that any referendum ever, regardless of context, regardless of voting methods, regardless of conduct should be accepted or all rejected?
That I must believe that the Quebec referendums in Canada are on the same credibilty level of the Austrian Anschluss?
You mean the referendum held in an area 1/4 the overall size of the Donbass? Where most people from the Donbass couldn't vote? That referendum?
So no ability to answer. As usual.
You do realise that (1) that referendum only took place in a small pocket of the Donbas.
Nor that does that, even if somehow representative, account for the citizens of the Zap or Kherson oblasts.
Why would Ukraine acknowledge and legitimise a referendum held by occupying powers who forcibly took land from them?
Yes, it was.
Absolutely. But do you have any credible evidence that a majority of people from the Donbass wanted to leave? Or in Kherson or in the Zap oblast?
So you do, what, reject or accept all referendums do you?
You still haven't given me a single reason to accept the Russian referendums held in 2022 in occupied Donbass/Kherson/Zap as fairly conducted.
Look, obviously I’m not going to humour this deliberately playing dumb. You know what the difference is.
I have repeatedly told you that the referendum was before the invasion. I can only assume that you pretending otherwise is just another instance of you deliberately wasting time.
Better system than your “referendums are only legitimate if they agree with what I want” perspective.
The one you had to be repeatedly told happened before the Russian invasion.
Ok, I'll start doing it to. What do you mean? I clearly gave you an answer. As I have mostly. What do you think "giving an answer" means? And what do you think "usual" means?
You didn't even know what year it took place in before this conversation
You also clearly don't realize that they aren't part of Donbas.
Nope. Anyone can go back and read what you said.
I have repeatedly told you that the referendum was before the invasion. I can only assume that you pretending otherwise is just another instance of you deliberately wasting time.
So no, you don't recognize the conflict of interest.
Better system than your “referendums are only legitimate if they agree with what I want” perspective.
I have repeatedly told you that the referendum was before the invasion. I can only assume that you pretending otherwise is just another instance of you deliberately wasting time.
I will not stop. The question remains unanswered: What’s the difference? Would it be justiified for France to notice that Wallonia hasn’t held a referendum on joining them, invade and then hold their own referendum there?
And I've repeatedly replied that the post-2014 referendums held by the Luhansk's People's Republic and Donetsk Republic don't represent everyone in the Donbass. Is that the referendum you are referring to here?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Donbas_status_referendums
Are you referring to these?
That's not my perspective.
No, I knew that happened. I just didn't think you genuinely thought a referendum that took place in a pocket of the Donbass area was somehow binding on the entire population of the Donbass. Apparently I was wrong.
No, you've hardly provided any answers.
As I said: No, I knew that happened. I just didn't think you genuinely thought a referendum that took place in a pocket of the Donbass area was somehow binding on the entire population of the Donbass. Apparently I was wrong.
No. I've pointed out that Russia also held sham referendums in the Kherson and the Zap oblasts. That even if the Donbass referendums prior to 2022 in the 2014-22 republics were somehow meaningful - that wouldn't somehow bind Kherson and the Zap oblasts. Russia also claims them too. What does the Donbass have to do with them? All you do when I bring them up is say that they're irrelevant, for some reason.
No, it was not. That was not ever my position.
As I said: I'm well aware of the referendums that the breakaway states conducted. I don't see how they're especially authoritative for the reasons I've already provided.
Not what I asked you: Do you have any credible evidence that a majority of people from the Donbass wanted to leave?
That's not what I asked you. You seem to have a binary view on all referendums. So do you reject or accept them all?
You can't do both.
As I said: I'm well aware of the referendums that the breakaway states conducted. I don't see how they're especially authoritative for the reasons I've already provided.
So Palestine should not get its land back?
Are you of the opinion the situation in Palestine is remotely equivalent to that of Northern Ireland?
And you did not answer my question. What do the people of Northern Ireland want?
I’m of the opinion that our struggle has been shared, as attested to by the history of anti-colonial collaboration between our countries.
They can live in Ireland or move back to the UK.
Right, that's still not what I asked you. I'm not asking what you think should happen. I'm asking you what do the people of Northern Ireland want now?
The people in Northern Ireland can move between Ireland and the UK, move into the UK - enjoy equal rights. There's no system of apartheid. They have their own institutions. They can use those institutions to eventually acquire independence, providing there's enough support.
I don’t value what colonisers want.
So lets go further. What do people who live in Ireland want? Do they want to launch a violent assault on Northern Ireland? What are you even proposing here?
Is everyone in Northern Ireland a coloniser, or are they only colonisers if they happen to disagree with unifying Northern Ireland with Ireland?
Yes, polling has shown support for Irish reunification since independence.
I am not proposing anything? I have said I do not condone the only effective tool we have, the only one that has ever given us our freedom.
Yes. You live in a colony, you’re a coloniser. It’s not complicated.
Supporting Irish reunification is not the same as supporting achieving that through violent ends.
I misread it originally, but plenty of countries in the modern-era have achieved independence without violence.
So does that include people of Irish background who do not support an immediate, instant unification with Ireland?
Depending of what you mean by taking it land back
England has been doing this for centuries.
What "people" are you talking about here? Everybody is a desendent of a descendent of a descendent... Meaningless.
If someone is a descendent of fascists and they're still carrying that banner, then they're still a fascist.
Your borders changed because you attacked the world. We got attacked by the world.
You openly laughed about the prospect of China invading Taiwan.
A situation that would cause millions to be killed potentially.
But can Westerners spread false information about China's collapse and the deaths of millions of people and then ridicule it?
They can call us "West Taiwan" and then mock about KMT taking over power?
Without looking, that thread looks tongue-in-cheek. You just posted Danny Haiphong who once went to Belgium and complained about all the blue and yellow he saw, thinking it was to do with being pro-Ukraine, except it was just that cities aesthetic.
I mean, that is a funny line.
Not really beating the accusation there
Report it if you think it's offensive and violates the rules. That's how moderation works here. And you'd expect more glee and negative sentiment because some countries are "underdogs" and some aren't. That doesn't make anything right, but that's how it is on the internet. Just do your part and report things which you think are inappropriate... Two wrongs don't make a right!
I did report. Only I was removed.
Yeah. I can't make a statement here, I wasn't involved and I can't read up on it. But you did the right thing, then with reporting things.
I don't think you being allowed to post political memes about other people's lives is rooted in whether your people were attacked in history. At least not directly... And I didn't attack nobody, so maybe I should play the victim card as well? I mean all of this is arbitrary. Why does Mongolia and everything up to Lake Baikal not belong to China? Why is Kaliningrad Russian and not Prussian? Why am I German in the first place? And why do we keep stupid little countries like Belgium or Luxembourg around? We had a lot of war and attacks happen in history of mankind...
Their borders changed after WWI when they got attacked by the world. But I see them reconquering their land in WWII is where you draw the line, so maybe you shouldn't do that?
No, revanchists would receive the outcome no matter who they are.
The Taiwanese don't want to be governed by the CCP.