Plebcouncilman

joined 11 months ago
[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

It’s the death of the macro culture. All the styles from all the previous eras now coexist and are very much in depending on what sub culture you belong too. Like if you are the edgy kind of teen right now you are wearing y2k style clothing, but if you are more of a normie you wear more classic street wear. If you’re a fashion forward guy in his late 20’s or early 30’s, 40’s to 60’s inspired menswear is the thing to wear. And so on.

[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago

This is hands down the most unhinged thing I’ve read in a long while. You really ought to go to touch grass or something my guy. I’ve never even seen someone say shit like this on 4chan, thats how absolutely unhinged you are dude,

[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works -2 points 2 months ago

It’s irrelevant, the message was never going to be let in.

[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works -2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Exactly you’re not debating my point at all, or at least it didn’t feel to me like you did but rather that you talked through me and went with something else that’s not really what I’m talking about in my original comment.

My point is not moderation is not required or wanted or needed, but rather that in this particular situation, Jay (Bluesky CEO) is overtly stating that she’s not going to allow people to be banned based on opinions that are not breaking the rules. There already is moderation, but they are not gonna crack down on people because they said something (and this is a hypothetical scenario though I think it’s also relevant; to be honest I don’t know the original comments that started the controversy) that some might consider transphobic based on their narrow interpretation of what is or isn’t an acceptable view point about transgender topics. This is the example I gave about myself, I’ve been called transphobic simply because I’ve suggested that it might, in some cases, have a neurological cause. And Ive read a few studies about the subject hence why I bring it up in the first place. I in fact was banned from a board here because of it, this is what Jay says she will not allow to happen. Which is healthy, and honestly the paradox of intolerance is not apodictic truth, and I’m becoming more and more convinced that it is actually more harmful through mechanics similar to the Streisand effect. But that’s neither here nor there.

If it seems to you that Im uninformed it’s more about me not wanting to put a lot of effort into comments and English actually being a second language. Most of my views are informed, if I’m not informed about something I usually don’t have a view until I become acquainted with the subject.

[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 months ago

https://news.gallup.com/poll/645704/slim-majority-adults-say-changing-gender-morally-wrong.aspx

Accepting that people can live as they wish is not the same thing as transphobia not being a common view.

[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works -3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (7 children)

I think the bit about cancel culture is a bit of a straw man argument because that’s not what we’re talking about here.

Look at my comment, again. Maybe someone is in favor of strong immigration laws, which I think is a totally valid opinion. If you define as Nazi anyone who agrees on any point with MAGA, you would probably call for that persons banning from the site under your paradox of free speech. But that’s only because your interpretation of Nazi is so loose that it doesn’t mean anything anymore. And with my example of being called transphobic, like you and someone else took it in entirely different directions than I even implied. I simply said that I believe it needs to be understood if it has a neurological cause or not in the sense of: is there a tangible neurological difference? Answering that question might help with understanding how to better help the population that suffers from gender dysphoria. I never implied or alluded to that if it was neurological it invalidated anything, much like I don’t think that ADHDs neurological nature means anything different other than we learned how to better treat the condition.

[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months ago

I know it’s not the same thing hence why I didn’t call it socialism and added the “national” to it.

[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 months ago

I’ve never said the opposite. It’s just a matter of, seeking knowledge which could result in finding ways to ease suffering. That’s exactly my position 100%.

[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Does your ISP allow port forwarding?

[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works 12 points 2 months ago

I don’t think there’s a lot of bad people in the world as in people with bad intentions. I’d say they are ignorant and selfish.

 

I’ve been permabanned from Reddit for harassment. I was fucking with some guys that liked anime in a non anime subreddit, I simply called them Chinese cartoons and they got mad, bigly. Anyways I trolled too much using that account so apparently they figured it was better to cut me off the website entirely. I would like to use Reddit still, but every account gets banned as soon as I make it. It tells me I can appeal but I can’t actually because that was more than a year ago.

If I delete that account and all associated accounts, and make new account not associated with them (new email), will it get banned too? I know reddit bans are not just IP bans but also use device ID and all that shit. Will I have to buy a new computer exclusively for Reddit? Or does my device becomes unflagged the moment I delete the banned account?

I need help with this shit. I like lemmy but there’s just not enough people here.

 

Since Meta announced they would stop moderating posts much of the mainstream discussion surrounding social media has been centered on whether a platform has a responsibility or not for the content being posted on their service. Which I think is a fair discussion though I favor the side of less moderation in almost every instance.

But as I think about it the problem is not moderation at all: we had very little moderation in the early days of the internet and social media and yet people didn’t believe the nonsense they saw online, unlike nowadays were even official news platforms have reported on outright bullshit being made up on social media. To me the problem is the godamn algorithm that pushes people into bubbles that reinforce their correct or incorrect views; and I think anyone with two brain cells and an iota of understanding of how engagement algorithms works can see this. So why is the discussion about moderation and not about banning algorithms?

view more: next ›