this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2026
34 points (94.7% liked)

Ye Power Trippin' Bastards

1744 readers
225 users here now

This is a community in the spirit of "Am I The Asshole" where people can post their own bans from lemmy or reddit or whatever and get some feedback from others whether the ban was justified or not.

Sometimes one just wants to be able to challenge the arguments some mod made and this could be the place for that.

Posting Guidelines

All posts should follow this basic structure:

  1. Which mods/admins were being Power Tripping Bastards?
  2. What sanction did they impose (e.g. community ban, instance ban, removed comment)?
  3. Provide a screenshot of the relevant modlog entry (don’t de-obfuscate mod names).
  4. Provide a screenshot and explanation of the cause of the sanction (e.g. the post/comment that was removed, or got you banned).
  5. Explain why you think its unfair and how you would like the situation to be remedied.

Rules

Expect to receive feedback about your posts, they might even be negative.

Make sure you follow this instance's code of conduct. In other words we won't allow bellyaching about being sanctioned for hate speech or bigotry.

YPTB matrix channel: For real-time discussions about bastards or to appeal mod actions in YPTB itself.

Some acronyms you might see.

Relevant comms

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com
unruffled@anarchist.nexus
34
Hi folks back with another confusing one (sopuli.xyz)
submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz to c/yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com
44 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

This post from a defense news website that I have read many articles on that is fairly straight forward and technical in its descriptions of military topics was removed because Jordan Lund saw "Blog" in the title and didn't bother to read any farther?

https://sopuli.xyz/post/42317112

https://defence-blog.com/israeli-firm-signs-deal-to-test-black-eagle-50e-drone-in-u-s/

Our Mission

Our mission is simple: to inform with integrity, report with clarity, and represent the people and communities engaged in today’s most complex security environments. We believe in journalism that earns respect — through facts, fairness, and a deep understanding of the issues at stake.

We cover everything from emerging military technologies and global arms trade to strategic doctrines, battlefield developments, and geopolitical dynamics. Our reporting is built on verification, sourcing, and careful attention to detail. We do not chase virality—we pursue clarity.

We strive to ensure our readers—whether they are in government, the armed forces, academia, industry, or the public—are equipped with the information they need to understand today’s rapidly evolving security environment. Defence Blog – Authority & Citations

Quoted by international news agencies (Reuters, AP, BBC, CNN). Referenced by government institutions including the U.S. Army and Department of Defense. Trusted by leading global defense companies and policy think tanks. Regularly used as a source for expert commentary in media and research. Recognized as a reliable voice in global defense and security analysis.

https://defence-blog.com/

Overall, we rate Defence Blog as Least Biased due to its focus on factual military updates, pro-NATO alignment, and substantial coverage of Western defense activities, particularly support for Ukraine. We also rate it as Mostly Factual due to its consistent sourcing from military-related accounts and reliance on official announcements, however, the occasional lack of hyperlinks makes it difficult to verify information.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/defence-blog-bias-and-credibility/

Does this sound like a blog about frivolous opinions that would bring down the quality of posts on a politics community? Does this pass the smell test to you?

I would think this was just another mistake, but Jordan Lund has a pattern of behavior around this topic that I find extremely problematic, and I think it was one of the reasons he was removed as a mod at Lemmy.World.

https://lemmy.world/post/36621226

See this post where Jordan Lund removes a post from Dropsite News a highly regarded news source that is directly referenced by many mainstream news outlets and includes among other stalwart journalists, Ryan Grim.

https://lemmy.world/post/41068936

https://www.dropsitenews.com/about

https://www.unftr.com/blog/progressive-spotlight-ryan-grim

Grim’s talent is in identifying stories that are under-reported or contradict the supposed ideals of America. Among the many themes he interrogates is the United States’ public position on human rights and democracy. Grim’s recent reporting on the United States’ role in effectively toppling the democratically elected government of Imran Khan has been first class, and he often brings those questions to U.S. State Department press conferences, where his back-and-forth with official government spokespeople can be captured for all to witness.

And while there’s an ever-growing roster of progressive journalists performing great work—whether on war, civil liberties, or economics—Grim is the rare reporter on the left who the establishment respects. While some may view that as a shortcoming, Grim’s penchant for relationship building, combined with a tenacious desire to get to the truth, has served him—and the rest of us—well.

Also

https://sopuli.xyz/post/19888013

https://lemmy.world/post/36976275

https://lemmy.world/post/26943875

https://lemmy.world/post/27393569

https://lemmy.world/post/36493647

I am extremely disappointed to say the least from having such a worrying and bad experience on such a sensitive timely political topic right after I had a good experience with the overall Lemmy.World instance mods from my previous post.

sigh This is a problem.

top 44 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca 3 points 16 hours ago

This is what’s wrong with the a lot of threaded discussion platforms, communities are tied to the moderation and having a disagreement with them means having to leave a community for another one instead of just being able to leave what's actually at issue, the moderation. Imagine if trying to email someone required you to use a different email provider to do so, each time limiting whom you could include in the chain.

[–] Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

PTB

It makes total sense for an online newspaper to potentially call itself "blog." It's parallel to print newspapers being called "journals." Any cursory glance at the source would show it's not a literal blog, just as any cursory glance at The Wall Street Journal would show it's not a literal journal.

The very least the mod could've done was actually check the link before deciding to remove it.

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 14 hours ago

This is a mod that removes dropsitenews.com for having substack in the footer. I don't like how they picked/use substack platform but it's definitely not a blog

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

PTB. Those main comms on world ban far more content types than they allow.

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Per your edit. Lemmy.world instance admins know and don't care. Well they care enough to strip JL of a pointless title but not enough to actually do anything about him or his actions as a mod or user.

[–] Blaze@lazysoci.al 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The LW staff putting the responsibility on the other mods to remove him was quite something.

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 day ago

Just wish that was surprising

[–] Susaga@sh.itjust.works 30 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

All you had to say was "Jordan Lund". He's well known in this community. He's done this before.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I know, I partially made this post as a collation of the most obvious stuff because the more research I did the more worrying this got for me.

[–] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's his own incoherent bias, he shouldn't be mod of any news community imo

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 day ago

And world admins seem to be fine with it. Probably because he's willing to do so much free work

[–] kingofras@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Jordan permabanned me from c/politics. Maybe I deserved a ban, but that’s besides the point.

The dude gets cancer. I send him well wishes and ask him if he would consider changing my permaban to a temp ban. Crickets.

For a dude who just got literal cancer after fairly cancerous mod behaviour for years, I don’t think his penny is dropping.

It’s really sad people like that wield that much power over a platform that’s struggling to get airborne.

On the plus side, he semi-owns .world communities, so at least he’s helping to bleed the oversized communities.

PTB

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 day ago

I did not know about the cancer and that genuinely sucks, it gives me some context at least I guess.

[–] Draconic_NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 1 day ago

PTB, it's jordanlund, that wasn't unexpected.

[–] southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 days ago

Well, at this point, I don't think this can be called PTB.

Not because it isn't a poor decision, it was.

But because that's a long standing policy of the c/ that isn't going to change, and has been debated to death already.

Regardless of any opinions about the policy, or individual removals, JL is pretty consistent in being zero tolerance with anything that smacks of blogging. That isn't a power trip, it's just a really persnickity rule.

Since no other action was taken, it can't be overreacting either. Mods gotta mod. The point of them being there is to keep a community on a given path, whether we agree with that path or not. It only becomes PTB when there's something other than basic curation going on. And that's what this is.

Fwiw, I don't agree with the totality of the rule, and disagree with this specific post actually breaking it, but it ain't my c/ to curate. I suspect, like you, that the presence of blog in the url is the cause of that decision. That being said, blog spam disguised as news is a problem, and having to track down every damn site individually is beyond what it's worth to have the posts there.

I dunno, it's difficult to say much more without just debating the validity of the site, which isn't useful here, so I avoid doing so whenever possible.

I guess to sum up, neither YDI or PTB, just a poor mod decision

[–] UniversalMonk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 2 days ago

It's .world. Don't expect logic. You'd be better off to block them and start your own communities. .world is the reddit of Lemmy. lol

[–] Diva@lemmy.ml 13 points 2 days ago

Classic jordanlund. PTB

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Jordan lives in last century regarding what journalism is and how it occurs. They come from a previous generation regarding editorial and content standards, and maybe the rule set was good for the period of 2005-2015, they effectively have ossified and refused to adapt to a continuously changing media landscape. Major changes happened from 1995-2005 and their content standards reflect that. However, its clear that is published anything on a platform too young to vote, isn't journalism according to Lund.

The reality is that things have changed massively in the previous 40 years of journalism, and you can no longer discount reporting, journalism, or analysis based on its source or format or platform. Dropsite news, Zeteo, etc. They have editorial boards. They have journalistic standards. They issue corrections. Likewise, youtube is as valid a platform as the NYT when it comes to journalistic content. The idea that the only valid form of content for political discussion needs to be in a form which existed before 2005 is ridiculous.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 12 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

I wish it was that innocent but I see and clear pattern of censorship of criticism of Zionism and Israel and a pattern of burying news about the Palestinian Genocide. To ignore that in your framing is at best naive.

This isn't a joke, this isn't abstract, the Palestinian Genocide is roaring along as we speak, choices have consequences.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Ofc it's both and they function together. The prohibition of alternative media essentially limits posts to hegemonic media which overwhelmingly supports genocide, etc.

[–] AntiBullyRanger@ani.social 3 points 1 day ago

Don't confuse innocence for journalism & news. Like others said 🧵, Land in the Jordan uses an archaic standard to rubric current news from ancient journalistic standards. Fascism has always thrived on those standards being compromised, while gaslighting civilian documents of ongoing genocides.
Weblogs allow both journalists and civilians to check the integrity of documents as they occur live, instead of having institutions arbitrate what is and is not the verifiable facts.
Zionists hate this precisely because they want to control narratives. And we shouldn't allow them the benefits to digressively victimize us.

[–] Wren@lemmy.today 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

In this case I believe the mod is enforcing an, albiet stupid, rule. I agree, it's a high quality publication that shouldn't be removed, but I get seeing the title and making a snap decision.

I posted the article to !Independent_Media@lemmy.today to help get it out there.

I sent MBFC an e-mail asking why they consider a pro-NATO alignment to be unbiased as well.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Yeah I wouldn't be upset about that if when I did some research I didn't find that Jordan Lund has a well documented extremely concerning pattern of silencing Palestinian voices and criticism of Israel. Ok a mod made a snap decision and it was wrong, that isn't really a problem in isolation but what is a problem is this isn't in isolation and it is in regards to a vitally important political topic for the US and the entire world. When you search for Jordan Lund you will find post after post talking about being censored for concerning or frivolous reasons as others have abundantly pointed out on this thread.

Fuck antisemitism, but those are bombs from my damn country being dropped on Palestinians, I have a right to talk about it, to make a stink about it, and to raise awareness about it. Similarly Lemmy.World has a RESPONSIBILITY to not just wave their hands and say "I don't like talking about this can't we all just be friends!".

Below use of "you" is meant generally, I realize I may have accidentally made it look like this was all meant in response to Wren, I did not intend that.

If you do not know how to handle this situation and feel like you are out of your depth of understanding on the Palestinian Genocide to the point where you realllllly can't see how toxic Jordan Lund's world views are and don't know what to do because you like sharing memes with Jordan on Discord/Matrix but also there are all these angry shrill people yelling about Palestine that don't seem to like him, you should not be in a position of power over the largest political community on the Fediverse. Grow up and take an adult responsibility over understanding the world you inhabit and impact, this is one of the most serious human rights violations in our lifetime and it is unfolding as we speak even still.

This is a not a time where innocently banning posts around this topic because you were going too fast can really be considered an innocent mistake, this is far too meaningful and impactful of a discussion and I am sorry but I just don't see any lighthearted instance mod thing happening here where all Jordan Lund did was see the word "Blog".

Jordan Lund clearly used it as an excuse to ban an article he did not like, consciously or subconsciously I don't really care, the evidence doesn't point in the way of this being a non-political accident regardless.

When people in the future look back and ask what Jordan was doing during the Palestinian Genocide, he will only be able to say he spent all of his time cynically calling into the question the motivations of people who were scared, emotionally impacted and alarmed by the mass murder of innocent children. He will only be able to say that he didn't believe it, he thought people were whining about it too much. He will not be able to say there was no way he could have known the violence was as real and as horrifying as everyone was saying it was, particularly because he has repeatedly participated in silencing discussion about it as a mod.

Do you think it is a good idea to be Jordan Lund's friend? Do you think it is good for your soul? Can you harmlessly interface with someone who uses their position in such a toxic way?

edited

[–] Wren@lemmy.today 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

I won't defend Jordan Lund or argue otherwise. If you can get in contact with an admin and make some headway on holding him and them accountable, I support you.

I've argued with him before about his moderation style. I don't agree with how or why he makes the decisions he does. He strikes me as someone who tells himself he's unbiased while holding considerable bias.

For now, I'm just doing what I can.

edit: what. How in the hell does this make me Jordan Lund's friend?

[–] Blaze@lazysoci.al 1 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Any reason to not use !world@quokk.au ?

[–] Wren@lemmy.today 3 points 12 hours ago

Because it's my community and I have qualms with piefed.

[–] TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca 2 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

Wat?

Because their mods clearly have a lot more political bias, they are hiding their username with a completely different one (not sure why, their original username sounds a lot more appropriate), they are managing way too many communities. Any reason you are pushing them?

Always helps to do a rudimentary check of whose community / instance you are switching over to.

[–] mrdown@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I shared it on my community apologiafreenews@piefed.social

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Thank you

[–] Mohamad20ZX@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 day ago

Here’s mine you’re all welcome anytime my dear friend https://sopuli.xyz/c/luxmandiscussions

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 7 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Not having a go at the validity of your source and I would 100% allow the post on !world@quokk.au, but damn MBFC is such a joke.

Overall, we rate Defence Blog as Least Biased due to its focus on […] pro-NATO alignment

“It’s least biased because it has a bias” imagine taking the time to write something so contradictory and asserting yourself as an authority on media bias.

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 hours ago

MBFC bot people got real aggressive when you suggested it was inaccurate or unhelpful.

It's purpose though is relevant though: it exists to provide that exact dynamic: unbiased bias. The bread and butter of most political trolls.

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

It's wild how much *better world politics comm was while he was away

[–] XLE@piefed.social 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

How do you view removed posts?

[–] Draconic_NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

When you're the one who created them you can still see them. Honestly people with a Link should be able to view them. Lemmy shouldn't return errors as casually as it does, Lemmy should only return an error when something isn't working, like a page that actually doesn't exist. Not for removals or user deletion.

[–] XLE@piefed.social 1 points 1 day ago

I agree, at least when it comes to seeing comments that were there (presuming they weren't removed).

[–] frongt@lemmy.zip -3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I mean, the site self-identifies as a blog. I'm not sure what you expected.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Cool the words are the same, do you think this source is really honestly a "blog" under any meaningful definition that would exclude it from high quality politics and defense discussion?

Is your position that the moderation of that community has a vendetta against the world "blog" but otherwise does not care about the quality of articles submitted?