this post was submitted on 11 Jan 2025
8 points (90.0% liked)

Unpopular Opinion

7593 readers
150 users here now

Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!


How voting works:

Vote the opposite of the norm.


If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.



Guidelines:

Tag your post, if possible (not required)


  • If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
  • If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].


Rules:

1. NO POLITICS


Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.


2. Be civil.


Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...


Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.


5. No trolling.


This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.


6. Defend your opinion


This is a bit of a mix of rules 4 and 5 to help foster higher quality posts. You are expected to defend your unpopular opinion in the post body. We don't expect a whole manifesto (please, no manifestos), but you should at least provide some details as to why you hold the position you do.



Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Edit 2025-01-13: LW has indicated they will be clarifying these rules soon. In the mean time, the community will remain locked until those are updated and deemed acceptable.


So the LW Team put out an announcement on new, site-wide moderation policy (see post link). I've defended, to many a downvote, pretty much every major decision they've made, but I absolutely cannot defend this one. In short, mods are expected to counter pretty much every batshit claim rather than mod it as misinformation, trolling, attack on groups, etc.

My rebuttal (using my main account) to the announcement: https://dubvee.org/comment/3541322


We're going to allow some "flat earth" comments. We're going to force some moderators to accept some "flat earth" comments. The point of this is that you should be able to counter those comments with words, and not need moderation/admin tools to do so.

(emphases mine)

Me: What if, to use the recent example from Meta, someone comes into a LGBT+ community and says they think being gay is a mental illness and /or link some quack study? Is that an attack on a group or is it "respectful dissent"?

LW: A lot of attacks like that are common and worth refuting once in awhile anyway. It can be valuable to show the response on occasion


I understand what they're trying to address here (highly encourage you to read the linked post), but the way they're going about it is heavy handed and reeks of "both sides"-ing every community, removing agency from the community moderators who work like hell to keep these spaces safe and civil, and opening the floodgates for misinformation and "civil" hate speech. How this new policy fits with their Terms of Service is completely lost to me.

I'll leave the speculation as to whether Musk dropped LW a big check as an exercise to the reader.

For now, this community is going dark in protest and I encourage other communities who may disagree with this new policy to join. Again, I understand the problem that is trying to be addressed, but this new policy, as-written, is not the way to do it.

(page 2) 39 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 1 points 5 months ago

I was waiting for something like this to happen. I'm not surprised it happened to world, mainly because it ended up as default.

[–] ech@lemm.ee 0 points 5 months ago (5 children)

So you (self-admittedly maining on another instance (in reality the admin of that instance)) are locking an entire community on LW in protest of their admin policy on their instance? That's bold, to put it mildly. You instance-ban users for downvoting, so it makes sense you find this change personally unreasonable.

Myself? I don't think the new change is a great idea, but I prefer it to short-fuse blanket bannings like that.

[–] muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee -2 points 5 months ago

Damn calling em out on their own community. Thats almost as funny as it is bold.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] khannie@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Am I missing something or is this policy change to combat the tankie mods who are just banning left and right for anything that doesn't match the tankie narrative?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] GrammarPolice@lemmy.world -1 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Hell yeah! I'm with you on this one. Maybe I should start intentionally brigading communities and start spewing fascist bullshit just so they can see how dumb this rule is

[–] horse_battery_staple@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] GrammarPolice@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Why are you on my ass bro?

[–] DragonsInARoom@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] GrammarPolice@lemmy.world -1 points 5 months ago

Ain't no way you just correct bro to 'brother'

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Blaze@sopuli.xyz -1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

@admiralpatrick@lemmy.world , seems like the LW admins changed their decision: https://lemmy.world/post/24135976

There will be a new announcement soon to clarify.

[–] admiralpatrick@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago

That's good news (hopefully). Thanks!

Will keep an eye out, but community is remaining locked until the clarifications are published and deemed acceptable.

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

Tl;dr

But: Yes, we need more respectful dissent.

There are so many people who no longer talk to people who think differently. I don't know whether it's cowardice or whether they've simply never learned to do so, or for whatever reason.

[–] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 1 points 5 months ago

I agree with you about respectful dissent. I have found that Lemmy, far moreso than other platforms, is afraid of hearing anything that challenges their beliefs and assumptions.

That said, their statement didn't even cover that. I would describe the need to be comments that are made in good faith, to better drive the conversation/understanding in a community.

Flat earthers rarely post in good faith. They are overwhelmingly trolls attempting to derail a conversation.

But someone that posts to a vegan community about a new study about the health effects of eating meat is sometimes acting in good faith. Articles like this can drive genuine conversation. It all depends on context.

Same for politics. Look at how badly posts were down voted for showing (valid) polls with Trump winning.

Hell, look at the various technology communities. If you don't have the approach of "Windows bad! Linux good!", you will be down voted or moderated.

Even in communities/topics loaded with trolls (climate change, LGBT, anything politics), there's still room for dissent in good faith.

[–] southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 months ago

Ehhhh, the problem with that is Brandolini's law, aka, asymmetrical bullshit.

The process of refuting bullshit takes more time and effort that spewing bullshit.

While the line of what is and isn't well established enough to not merit dissent vs just removing bullshit can be cloudy, it isn't cloudy in everything.

Hell, the very example used, flat earth, is 100% not worth refuting again. It's empty headed bullshit that is so well established that it wastes everyone's time and electricity countering it at all. It just needs to be moderated away.

There is no respectful dissent about some things, period.

You come out with some anti vaccination stupidity? Bye. You already ignored a century of established data on the subject, one more internet rebuttal isn't fixing your stupidity.

Come in with nazi rhetoric? Bye, because fuck a nazi piece of shit.

We're not talking about a difference of opinion on whether roasting is better than pan frying. The kind of things the policy was trying to address are the kind of issues where there's no such thing as respectful discourse to begin with. It's about political rhetoric.

The problem is that the admins made the policy over broad, giving it the shotgun treatment, and it was a horrible move.

[–] FelixCress@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Yes, we need more ~~respectful~~ dissent.

This. Too many mods don't understand their role and mistake it with being a censor. While I don't think I have seen it in this particular sub (or at least I don't remember seeing it) , I have definitely seen it in the others.

[–] NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

We need more dissent in general, and of course it should be respectful, whereever possible.

(i did not mean to say that our existing dissent should become more respectful)

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee -3 points 5 months ago (3 children)

I'll leave the speculation as to whether Musk dropped LW a big check as an exercise to the reader.

And u call the right wingers the conspiracy theorists. Musk could not give 2 fucks about lemmy.

The lw admins have realised to compete as a platform in the marketplace if ideas u cannot censor ideas. Musk made the first move meta has been forces to follow as so is lemmy.

Why are u so concerned that u can be held accountable for any authoritarian censorship u may partake in?

Also i dare u to delete this comment.

[–] DragonsInARoom@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Is having a site-wide policy controlling who gets to "respectfully disagree" not a control of speech?

[–] muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee -3 points 5 months ago

Rhink before typibg please. Ur objectivly wrong.

  1. It doesnt control who gets to respectfully disagree it grants everyone that liberty (u included)

  2. Its not a control of speach its a control of moderators ability to control speach

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›