So for context, a certain Zionist Feddit admin complained earlier about being banned from lemmy.ml and they recently got banned from here for the same thing. But they were not banned from sh.itjust.works and made a post complaining in !meanwhileongrad@sh.itjust.works, I'm not linking that directly they've already accused me of brigading their community.
Anyway I argued with them for a while and continued to shoot down their deflections and justifications (way longer than anyone should argue with any Zionist troll) and goat decides to respond to me accusing me of using antisemitic symbols, the triple parentheses. Now what I actually used were 3 sets of quotation marks but he said they were similar. And asked me to edit the post. What do you think?
Is he right? Should I edit the comment? Or is he just trying to deflect from my criticism by saying it's antisemitic?
No bans or removals have happened yet in this situation as of writing this.
Edit: I want to say, that the reaction to this post is shameful, many of the people below in this posts' comments are some of the legitimately most disgusting people on planet earth. Holy fuck I anticipated some nastiness but never this much.
I'm not making another of these posts and I will be reporting and blocking any of the dipshits who make accounts to harass me in my DMs.
Maybe I fucked up, maybe I was too harsh. Maybe I owe some people apologies. I don't know at this point and I suspect I will never know for sure.
Also if you came here legitimately giving feedback and not just bad-jacketing or harassing me. I thank you and the above message wasn't meant for you. This post has been brigaded and shut down by a Zionist troll harassing me with a deluge of alt accounts.
Adendum to my post:
I should've known better than to trust or listen to @goat@sh.itjust.works in any way... I don't know how I missed this but if I saw this before posting this thread I never would've posted this thread at all, because there isn't any logic whatsoever here, and any assessments of me or dbzer0 made by goat are being made in bad faith.
Implying that Israel (which also oftentimes is used to say „the JEWS“ without sounding too antisemitic) is controlling foreign Governments is no antisemitic dogwhistle. That’s absolut classic „Protocols of the Elders of Zion“- level-antisemitism. The probably most famous iteration be the Judeo–Bolshevism.
Let me be clear, I never said the jews. I say Israel because I mean Israel. Israel is the problem. Specifically their military and administration who are still caying out violence towards Palestinians. Anyone claiming I said Jews was lying to trying to smear me or both.
Actually this whole situation feels a lot like this the more and more I think of it. Misdirection in the form of antisemitic ""allegations"" or acusations is very common when Zionism is called out. It's not surprising people will dig for anything including things not intended or even there at all.
Imho a big problem in this context is this: There is a mix of people using antisemitic dogwhistles and metaphors without knowing it an people hiding behind this as an excuse to be as antisemitic as they want without repercussions. (Which, as I think of it, is the definition of „dogwhistle“)
If someone tell‘s you you were using a dogwhistle, accept, apologise and rephrase. Not because you did something bad on purpose, but because you gave intentional „dogwhistlers“ another innocent-mistake-example to hide behind.
I get what you're saying but at the same time I do feel giving this too much energy just turns it into something Zionsits will use to derail arguments with accusations of antisemitism. This becomes even more of a problem because dogwhistles can be invented for the purpose of leveraging your exact sentiment to hurt or stifle discussions about Zionism.
I mean a similar thing happened when 4channers tried to make the okay hand symbol 👌 recognized as a dogwhistle and the ADF bought it for a while. But what that only shows is that your methodology is flawed, because it ultimately gives power to these horrible people in other ways that hurt advocacy.
I mean this approach treats the bad actors who do this like the won't adapt to the approach and just shrug or cry, but they do. They adapt in ways that create more problems, like creating new dogwhistles that overlap with common language to make these sorts of occurrences more common, and more disruptive. They end up being a distraction that benefit liberals and/or Zionists more than they hurt the people using said dogwhistles.