this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2026
303 points (92.9% liked)
Fediverse
40446 readers
553 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, Mbin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)
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
Oh, yeah, "They removed my comment where I'm just an asshole and telling people to kill themselves, they are such zionists 😭"
The fuck is wrong with you guys?
The regular: too much internet, not enough grass being touched.
"Rules are important! I’m a good German, I follow the rules." -German soldier in the 1940s
Cool non-answer. What part of civility rules typical across lemmy such as dbzer0's own
allows exceptions for unhinged promotion of violence against commenters whom we unreasonably allege or "bad-jacket" as Zionist? Uncivil denunciations of Zionism are uncivil; therefore, moderators enforcing civility must prosecute. No evidence was given the moderators penalize civil denunciations of Zionism. Enforcing civility doesn't imply Zionism.
This is basic logic. Denying basic logic implies staggering stupidity or dishonesty.
Dbzer0 civility rules aim to protect marginalized people from harassment. feddit.org's are being deployed to protect Zionism from criticism while tone-policing Palestinians and their allies. These aren't the same thing just because they both use the word 'civility.'
feddit isn't exactly enforcing civility neutrally. They're silencing anti-Zionism while treating Zionist positions as the default that deserves civil engagement. That's a political choice with the fig leaf of 'just following ~~orders~~ the law', hardly 'basic logic'. But thanks for explaining to a silly girl like me
Aside from the fact that following the law should be an understandable concession to wanting your instance to continue existing:
I don't think I've seen any Anti-Palestine sentiment there. I'm also pretty sure most of us are on the same page about Zionism. This dispute is about the way that we express it, which is being framed as defending it and compared to actively perpetrating genocide.
There is a significant difference between following laws about hatespeech and following orders to actually murder people. Erasing all nuance doesn't help the actual discourse about what we all agree is systematic genocide against the Palestinian people.
Yeah, the good old "You are a Nazi for following rules"-thing. Because everyone who follows rules does so indly, except for oneself.
How would you categorize the community rules "Be nice to each other", "Don't insult each other" and "Don't call for violence"? Just or unjust, dair or unfair, sensible or dumb, expedient or not?
How would you categorize the feddit.org admin using a snark comm to get people to send DM harrassment to users who upvoted the feddit.org defederation thread?
is that 'being nice'?
I followed your link. It shows a comment you made, yet with another link to a comment by Emopunker@feddit.org. And you claim that they harass people. The comment by Emopunker shows a screenshot where three usernames are listed that share similarities. Emopunker says that they have the suspicion that the shown users are the same person with alt accounts.
In conclusion: I wonder whether you forgot to attach some context, because based on this alone I don't see anything that support your claims.
In the thread I linked the thread op and several others were complaining about DM harrassment.
That was happening immidiately after emopunker decided to post the names of three upvoters of the defederation thread in meanwhileongrad, while the vote was still happening.
It's a pretty straightforward chain of events, if you're insisting on seeing nothing I think the problem is between your keyboard and your chair
Basing this on a temporal chain of events alone is weak. I'll give you, that there might be a connection: names listed -> harassment started.
That does not mean that Emopunker is responsible though. Could have been another user. Could have been you for all I know. Could also have happened for other reasons. And, there is still the possibility that it might have no connection to this at all.
You'll need to provide some stronger evidence, otherwise I'll take this as baseless accusations and, possibly, a defamation attempt.
Feel free to deliver, especially since you seem to be observing this. I'd like to know whether an admin on the instance I am using is harassing people.
They posted to the snark comm, the harassment follows. Just because there's no proof they were personally sending the messages doesn't absolve them of responsibility for their actions.
if anything the defamation was coming from emopunker, declaring people upvoting the thread about their instance being zionist as 'the same person' to a snark comm was pretty clearly implying a call to action for someone
Fair point.
I am on the fence about the 'snark comm' ordeal. I think such communities are – to some degree – meaningful for a critical discourse. Imo, one should be allowed to point out and criticise users, communities, whole instances.
Then again, this should not make someone a target for harassment.
From my pov, it's a question of balancing interests here: civilised criticism is important and should be allowed. Especially in such public spaces. Denying this due to a hazard of making them a target for people who see this as a 'call to action' would suffocate such discussions completely. So I'd address the harassers and sanction them, instead of people who merely point things out they find suspicious, as in this case.
So unless Emopunker directly incited the harassment or did it themselves, I'd lean towards: "yeah, somewhat uncool to throw such accusations in the room without further proof, but that doesn't make them the culprit".
Why the whataboutism? Please answer my question and do not answer with whataboutism or the discussion is over.
you started the whataboutism with 'what about the community rules"
please answer my question and do not answer with whataboutism or the discussion is over.
Wrong. I criticised the db0-governance post for delivering supposed evidence for feddit.org-admins' supposed zionism that actually only were evidence for db0-users behaving like assholes.
And since you can only deflect and not actually argue, this discussion is over. In case you wonder why I won't answer furher comments by you, I can't see them anymore since I place you on my blocklist. People like you are the reason I'm really considering placing lemmy.ml as an instance on that list. Well done.
Bye, your contributions to the conversation won't be missed
Oooh, they downvoted you with both of their accounts.
That's just called "being nice", tankie.
Go back to reddit
I want to clarify that I was being extremely sarcastic in that comment. I was mocking the anti-"tankie" user for saying "follow the rules and be nice" but doing "downvote people with your alt account".
Ah, my bad
People like them have nothing to offer but deflection and whataboutisms. Blocking them allows the propaganda to spread and influence others uncontested. Best method is to downvote their posts but don't engage with them, they feed off of the attention they get.
Na, I don't have a lot of spoons for this anymore. I don't want to read that, because I'm a little impulsive sometimes and have a hard time not to engage, and I need the energy for people I may actually convince. Not just in political questions, just generally. There are more important things than infighting on the internet.
Easy: unjust, unfair, dumb.
Nazis easily pretend to be the nice people following the rules and if you get angry you're the bad one. Don't be nice to Nazis. Yell at them, insult them, punch them. Enforcing laws to protect oppressors is nothing more than protecting oppressors. "The only legitimate violence is state violence" and all that propaganda.
The Nazis are the ones breaking the "be nice" rule in the first place, they just do it while speaking nicely, they talk about enforcing rules and protecting order, but somehow they always dodge the question of how many people their order is killing. That's not being nice. The rule is only there to forbid you for fighting back.
If you think that the "be nice" rule should punish calls to take down Israel or contest german support for the genocide, but not punish that same support for the genocide because it's nice and polite... You're just protecting the genocide. It doesn't matter if anti-genocide comments are not nice enough for you - they shouldn't have to be nice. Especially not when the German government literally makes it illegal to denounce Israel, even nicely.
A "be nice" rule is bad when there's another rule that says it's illegal to denounce genocide.