this post was submitted on 31 Dec 2025
88 points (95.8% liked)

Slop.

753 readers
488 users here now

For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Damarcusart@hexbear.net 23 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (14 children)

Ok, since you aren't interested in debate, we don't need to do anything like that. That's fine, I don't really want to debate this topic either.

It is a shame that when I ask about your thoughts about this work, your response is to provide someone else's thoughts on it. You're really not beating any allegations that you haven't actually read it and that you aren't just hating on it because others have told you to do so.

Seriously, it's extremely short. It's barely over a thousand words. If you've read through this entire comment thread you've probably read more than this entire work. I'm not asking you to agree with me or make any sort of big life change or anything, but please, just read it and form your own opinions, you don't need to share them if you don't want to, but I do want you to think for yourself and make up your own mind. https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm

EDIT: Holy shit, this guy actually ran away to his own instance to cry about the evil tankies talking about a fucking thousand word pamphlet he's too scared to read and form his own opinion on. I think this might actually be the most pathetic loser on the fedverse. Also I recognise them now, they're the same loser who loves abusing the idea of disengaging when they realise they're showing their whole ass in a discussion. So not just a loser, but also toxic and abusing a system designed to help people with triggers and mental health issues too!

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com -3 points 1 day ago (11 children)
[–] krolden@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 day ago (10 children)

Is this the cringe mantra you repeat while sticking your fingers in your ears?

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com -3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

That's a rule from your own instance you should probably respect

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Except you aren't following correctly either

Use of Disengage

Any user may disengage from any discussion by posting a two word, and only two word, reply: "I'm Disengaging". Stipulations:

  • Do not post a lengthy reply and then end it with "I'm disengaging."
  • Do not disengage yet continue to reply directly/indirectly to the user or about the user.
  • Do not complain when someone properly uses the feature on you.
  • Do not try to circumvent these restrictions by vague posting or bringing it up later in another thread.
  • Do not retroactively use disengage through editing posts or comments. Abusing disengage, failure to abide a proper disengagement, or circumventing the stipulations can result in moderator action.
[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Sorry what part did I not follow correctly? That I said "disengage" and not "I'm disengaging"? In any case this wasn't how it was phrased in the past.

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Do not try to circumvent these restrictions by vague posting or bringing it up later in another thread.

And in other areas doing it as end of a reply that could be taken as an attack/making fun of them.

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

Where did I vague post about or bring up damascusart later?

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 11 hours ago (1 children)
[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

Ah, nice goalpost moving. Probably double-checked and realized your initial gotcha didn't work.

Anyway, that's our instance. That doesn't have the same disengage rules as yours. Leaving a neutral comment along with the disengage isn't against our rules.

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Ah, nice goalpost moving. Probably double-checked and realized your initial gotcha didn't work.

Says the one who didn't know the hexbear disengage rules.

That wasn't a neutral comment but you love to do that when it's in your favor

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

Says the one who didn't know the hexbear disengage rules.

Says the one who correctly used the disengage rule in hexbear, while those multiple hexbears blatantly disrespecting it (again, in hexbear) don't get any trouble, which is typical hypocrisy for hexbears and their cliquish shite.

Looks like I was right on the money on the failed "gotcha" too

That wasn't a neutral comment but you love to do that when it's in your favor

Agree to disagree. I left it as a lighthearted "I don't understand wtf you're on about". And it's not like I banned someone from replying to that disengage either.

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 8 hours ago

If you want to be pedantic then you technically haven't used disengage here as it does need to be an acknowledgement of disengagement and leaving said thread as you haven't. You're use can be considered, if we're being pedantic like you want to be, saying the other needs to not you triggering the rule.

Agree to disagree. I left it as a lighthearted "I don't understand wtf you're on about". And it's not like I banned someone from replying to that disengage either.

Was definitely calling them out then doing mic drop you can't argue.

Says the one who correctly used the disengage rule in hexbear, while those multiple hexbears blatantly disrespecting it (again, in hexbear) don't get any trouble, which is typical hypocrisy for hexbears and their cliquish shite.

Again going back to the not following it and then not even respecting it. I saw what 1 user bringing it up before hand but sure say it's all hexbear

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)