this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2024
34 points (68.9% liked)

Fedigrow

625 readers
28 users here now

To discuss how to grow and manage communities / magazines on Lemmy, Mbin, Piefed and Sublinks

founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
 

Modlog visible here: https://lemmy.world/modlog/2

Or on !fediverse@lemmy.world

I have no stake in this argument (centralization on both lemmy.ml and lemmy.world is detrimental in my opinion), but I found it kind of ironic.

Not sure if this is the best place to post it, but didn't know of any "neutral" fediverse communities, so I guess this one works.

Edit: the thread itself: https://lemmy.world/post/16211417

Some examples of removals/bans: https://reddthat.com/post/20718767/11186767

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jet@hackertalks.com -5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I think this illustrates the core problem very well. Attacking the character of the poster, and their motivations, rather than the content itself. Is very problematic for open discourse. And that's probably fine at the comment counter comment level. But when we are talking about banning people the bar should be higher than ad hominem

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 18 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You want to explain to me how historical misinformation is just an 'ad hominem'?

Like, at the fucking core, that is objectionable content.

[–] jet@hackertalks.com -5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I don't particularly care to debate world war II politics, but I think there is enough data there to have a discussion, rather than questioning somebody's character for even bringing it up. I don't actually care about community level moderation decisions, I only care about instance level bans.

Banning somebody from an instance for referring to historical events, seems questionable for a cornerstone Lemmy instance to do. And that is a valid discussion to have here.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact


The Soviet Union, which feared Western powers and the possibility of "capitalist encirclements", had little hope either of preventing war and wanted nothing less than an ironclad military alliance with France and Britain[\[50\]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact#cite_note-FOOTNOTECarley1993324-53) to provide guaranteed support for a two-pronged attack on Germany.[\[51\]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact#cite_note-FOOTNOTEWatson2000695-54) Stalin's adherence to the collective security line was thus purely conditional.[\[52\]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact#cite_note-55) ```
[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 18 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I don’t particularly care to debate world war II politics,

Yet here you are. Funny way of not particularly caring.

but I think there is enough data there to have a discussion, rather than questioning somebody’s character for even bringing it up.

Oh, cool, as long as it's Just Asking Questions(tm) it's okay. Next up, we'll do "Was Hitler REALLY a BAD guy?" and "Did the Holocaust REALLY kill millions of people?"

Banning somebody from an instance for referring to historical events, seems questionable for a cornerstone Lemmy instance to do.

"Referring to historical events"

By calling the Soviet invasion of Poland 'bloodless' and accusing the Poles of being the REAL Nazis, who the Soviets had to invade to defeat fascism?

Yeah, that's not 'referring to historical events', that's 'referring to pure fucking fantasy and passing it off as historical fact'.

It's curious how many times I run into defenders of people like this who insist that they have no skin in the game but still bend over backwards to accommodate the most horrendous views. I must just not be enlightened enough to understand.

[–] jet@hackertalks.com -2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Again I'm not going to debate world war II.

The severe issue at hand is banning somebody from an instance, an instance which runs about 30% of all Lemmy traffic, because of a ad hominem attack against their character for having what looks to be a legitimate perhaps misguided discussion in a news community.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 12 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Again I’m not going to debate world war II.

But your entire point rests on the idea that these posters engaging in atrocity denial is 'just a disagreement' that should be tolerated. So pretty clearly you are debating WW2, otherwise you wouldn't be defending their right to "Just Ask Questions" about Soviet massacres of the Polish people.

The severe issue at hand is banning somebody from an instance, an instance which runs about 30% of all Lemmy traffic, because of a ad hominem attack against their character for having what looks to be a legitimate perhaps misguided discussion in a news community.

Jesus fucking Christ. Correctly identifying and banning someone for spreading misinformation is 'a ad hominem attack', and genocide denial is just 'legitimate perhaps misguided discussion'.

What a fucking world.

[–] Shyfer@ttrpg.network 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

By your logic should we ban all the Zionists in Lemmy.world denying all the dead Palestinians and calling them Hamas. Because there's a lot. The point is, these things become extremely subjective.

EDIT: Just saw that some people said the invasion of Poland was bloodless. Those kinds of comments do sound like straight up misinformation, though, so it's not all subjective lol.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

By your logic should we ban all the Zionists in Lemmy.world denying all the dead Palestinians and calling them Hamas.

I wouldn't object.