this post was submitted on 24 May 2024
142 points (99.3% liked)
Chapotraphouse
14170 readers
633 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You're talking about Reddit, not the New York Times.
whats the difference
O_o
were you surprised to discover that the new york crimes echoes the same ecofascist genocidal sentiments that we see on reddit
they aren't anything new and have been around since at least the green revolution (in their modern iteration)
No idea what you're rambling on about.
I gotta ask, are you incapable of reading or are you unwilling to read? Because DivineChaos100 responded to you with two links to NYT articles about this issue, in this comment, which was posted before CarmineCatboy2 asked you to comment on those NYT articles. And yet, you're here acting as though this didn't happen. But I can read and I understand what time stamps are, so I know that you have been shown evidence that the NYT believes similar things to the r/Collapse subreddit before this comment where you pretend such a thing never happened.
So I'll repeat CarmineCatboy2's question to you, and maybe you'll answer it this time: Were you surprised to discover that the new york crimes echoes the same ecofascist genocidal sentiments that we see on reddit?
You've missed an option here which is the option I noted: I didn't understand CarmineCatboy2's question.
CarmineCatboy2 didn't ask me to comment on those NYT articles, they mentioned "new york crimes" which only now that I've read your comment do I realise is a play on the name "New York Times".
I'm not acting. I didn't understand what CarmineCatboy2 was going on about and I said as much. If I might be so bold as to offer some unsolicited advice: maybe in future just assume that when someone says they don't understand what another is saying, they're doing so because they don't understand what the other is saying.
I'll rephrase this question in order to favour clear communication:
Were you surprised to discover that the New York Times echoed the same ecofascist genocidal sentiments that we see on Reddit?
I made no such discovery, I didn't look at the New York Times articles that were linked to. Had I discovered that, I would not be surprised.
sounds like you have a tendency to resist leaving your ideological tribal traps
LOL not sure what tribal ideological traps you think the New York Times would have the weight to cause me to leave
i don't know, you tell me why you refuse to read links to ecofascism in the mainstream media. after all, you're the person who thinks there's nothing to be concerned about.
I haven't refused as nobody has asked me to read the linked-to articles. They've only expected me to.
I've been expecting you to shit yourself.
I admit it never even so much as crossed my mind that someone on the internet (and specifically commenting all over this thread) might not understand that the phrase "new york crimes" refers to the NYT. So one point to you I suppose.
This probably also explains why you're confused in the subthread where someone told you this isn't the first time recently you've defended
You probably think they're actually talking about the website actually called Stormfront. They're not. They're talking about reddit, which you did, in fact, defend not 20 hours ago.
I disagree. I wasn't defending Reddit, I was questioning the rationality of a Lemmy poster. There's a difference.
No investigation, no right to speak.
Reddit communities with 500k subscribers, for better or for worse, can influence culture at large. Making a post to begin a discussion on the potential dangers of such a large community's moderation policies is not an unworthy endeavor.
This doesn't seem like such a post. Firstly, it doesn't seem to me like beginning a discussion on a Reddit community's moderation policies here has any worth. It might have worth if the discussion was begun in the Reddit community itself but I can't see any worth beginning a discussion here.
Secondly, this post doesn't seem like an effort to begin an earnest discussion about potential dangers of moderation policies at all, it seems more like a mindless "ZOMG1!!!!1 LOOK AT THE FASCISTS ON REDDIT!!! WERE AMAZING AND THEIR STOOPID!!!"
are you... personally invested in this?
Lol
lol,this isn't even the first time you've defended
on here, shut up nerd
Firstly, I'm not defending anyone. Secondly, I've no idea what you're referring to.
You don't remember posting this 19 hours ago, apparently.
It has been brought up multiple times there but it's banned outright as it's being "bad faith".
I'm not suggesting doing that, I'm just contrasting the difference in value of discussions in the different fora.
Maybe the "value of discussion" you see here is a direct consequence of the fact that normal discussion cannot be had about the topic over there.
holy shit you are certainly one... spectacle of a human being
no no no
We are amazing and they are stupid gtfo lib
I don't know what you mean by that.
You did understand gtfo though you dumbass
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/01/us/the-unrealized-horrors-of-population-explosion.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/06/15/sunday-review/overpopulated-and-underfed-countries-near-a-breaking-point.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/09/18/opinion/human-population-global-growth.html
And also we're talking about a sub with half a million people.