For the record I was posting in support of inclusive language, but pointing out that context and convention matter.
They seem to have even scrubbed my comment from their instance, lol.
Blahaj mods (especially the one modding ghazi, transgender and 196) are the worst kind of mods. They promote blatant misinformation, remove posts calling said misinformation out, and they ban people and label them transphobes despite there being no transphobic words or implications whatsoever in your comments.
Just block the entire instance and move on. There are better instances that better represent the lgbt community.
Source: my ban message is the same as yours, and I have never said or implied anything remotely transphobic.
What I hate about blocking instances is that I no longer seem to get inbox notifications when a member of the instance comments on something in response to me, outside of that instance.
Like, my beef isn’t with blahaj users, and I don’t want to unintentionally ignore them because their admin/s are nutballs.
Unless it’s hexbear in which case the users are also nuts
I can tell you that a lot of the blahaj users hold the same mentality.
Basically everyone on Lemmy not sucking their toes is a transphobe, even if you’ve never said a single word about trans people at all.
What are the better instances?
There isn’t (Although Lemmy.World & programming.dev are)
How do you see why you were banned from a page? I was banned from 196 too and I have absolutely no idea what I could have said.
They named their instance after an IKEA product so I can only assume it’s a group of trans capitalists who fawn over corporations
From the Book of the Dude, the holy book of the Dudeism religion:
Incidentally, the term “dude” is commonly agreed to refer to all genders. Most linguists contend that the diminutive “dudette” is not in keeping with the parlance of our times.
So what you’re saying is that ban is religious discrimination?
I don’t want to be called dude or dudette, but I’m 95% certain this will change whenever I finally watch that movie.
Wouldn’t be a leftist platform if they didn’t spend the majority of their time and effort self policing based on their purity tests instead of doing something actually productive
The People’s Front of Judea vs the Judean People’s Front!
I still remember watching that socialist convention that spent an hour doing nothing but teaching people to wave their hands in the air to signal applause and running someone down that dared to use the word “guys”. Point of Personal Privilege, my ass.
Dude is gender neutral
Not to everyone, and that’s cool, until someone tells you not to call them dude anymore. Then your an asshole if you try to argue the gender neutrality of the term dude. Such as telling someone to get over it.
That’s like anything. If my name is Abigail and I don’t wanna be called Abby, I don’t have to hear an excuse as to why you wanna call me Abby. If someone isn’t comfortable being called a thing and they tell you so, you fucking abide by that. Everything else is weirdo behavior.
I’m a dude, he’s a dude, she’s a dude, we’re all dudes, yea!
How many dudes have you fucked?
Only the homies.
I call my wife dude all the time so at least one.
I lost count
deleted by creator
Using “dudes” as a common noun, is different from using “dude” as a vocative, apples to oranges my dude
So is bitch, but if you ask someone to stop calling you bitch and they tell you to get over it, then they’re assholes.
That’s because bitch is an insult
Insult is very subjective. I have friends that call me and I call bitch all the time.
You’re arguing that the context is subjective to the word provided yes? Yet your example is also subjective, clearly when your friends call you bitch it’s not meant as an insult. I can’t think of a single instance in which using dude as an insult is going to get someone offended on purpose, where bitch definitely can be used purposefully.
Dude can be used as an insult when used to refer to someone who specifically said they don’t want to be called dude. I don’t know why this is so hard for you. If people don’t want to be called something, don’t call them that. Definitely don’t tell them it’s their fault if they’re offended and they need to get over it.
Yeah that’s not how language works, that’s how pestering works, just because you don’t like to be called Apple and I call you an apple doesn’t mean that apple is now magically an insult word.
I don’t know why this is so hard for you
Nope. That’s exactly how language works. You seem to be confused.
Big stretch there bud.
Cuntycunt
This community only has one rule so far: if you’re gonna troll, it had better be clever and entertaining. Make of that what you will.
Wow. That is about the tamest comment that’s ever gotten someone banned.
I’ve seen worse for just for putting criticism in threads asking for user’s “questions, concerns, requests and issues”. And at the admin level, in a major instance where they never really apologized or corrected themselves until a couple of months later without really assuming any blame.
I’m just glad I’m not the only one who views dude as androgynous.
I thought I was one of the few.
Dude and cunt applies to all genders.
deleted by creator
And DINGUS.
Contextually gendered
I find it androgynous and will use it for anyone, but if anyone told me they were uncomfortable with me referring to them that way, I would stop, as with anything. It’s simply decent to refer to people as they prefer.
I find these always interesting to read in the following sentence: ‘I fucked a bunch of dudes’.
Do you also believe that this sentence would work for you? (Assuming you are a heterosexual)
Because I always thought I was in the ‘Dude is androgynous’ camp, but after considering that sentence: I don’t think so anymore
Conflation due to context?
I think sexual activity adds implied gender relationships that shift how ‘dude’ is interpreted. While ‘dude’ can feel androgynous in casual contexts, in a phrase like ‘fucked a bunch of dudes,’ the sexual framing amplifies its masculine connotations. This shows how cultural norms around sexuality and gender can override attempts at neutrality.
Most of the women I’ve fucked have been dudes.
A few weren’t.
It’s male-leaning, although it gets used androgynously.
If someone personally didn’t want to be called dude, I’d avoid it. Otherwise it’s not worth freaking out over.
I was once told my choice of defaulting to referring to people as they/them is offensive to nonbinary people. I don’t necessarily know your pronouns at that particular instance of time when speaking, and being offensive is not my intention, but it seems to happen anyway.
Which is why I call they/them the equal oppurtunity offender. It doesn’t discriminate in its neutralness.
Wait until they hear what non-binary sounds like in Spanish, a language that genders every noun as either male or female.
At least from one Non Binary, I default they/them and have no idea why I personally would find it offensive.
I usually get a lot of hate when I call it “binary thinking” to see only two extreme polar opposite sides to any issue. Some people don’t relate to that term outside of gender issues.
This is the most retarded shit about us on the left. We fight over every little thing while the right can unite over only one issue.
They/them is extremely practical and I’ve yet to meet a non-binary person in real life who complains about the umbrella usage of it. Some people just want to be offended or want to police behaviour. They should stay on twitter.
What the hell? I call everyone they these days as to not offend anyone, I’m trying to be inclusive with this.
Once it’s cheap enough, I will unironically just pay for Gemmini or something to monitor my comments and keep track of all the rules. I can’t possibly deal with all the nuances and expectations of every instance.
If someone is still offended after that, idk what to say.
Just don’t care if you get banned other than to whine about it in whine subs.
They could not in fact get over it, dude.
They must feel very strongly about the word dude. I’m in your camp on it. It’s an exclamation, nothing more 🤷
deleted by creator
Sweet
“Using the power of the Continuum Transfunctioner, we will now banish you to Hoboken New Jersey.”
Joke’s on them, I’ve shadow banned them.
The key is that you said “but…” which in some communities fails the test of absolute 100% agreement and makes you The Enemy. I had a very similar experience there, in my case it was saying someone who is “uncomfortable” with gender issues might not actually “hate” anybody, they could just be having trouble overcoming how they were raised. But in the end it’s like if a TV channel stops but you get thousands of other channels, so oh well <shrug>.
Consider the source of the action(a person pursuing a position of authority on a relatively miniscule network) and keep on keeping on. Decades of forums moderated by basement dwellers with a Napoleon complex have made it hard for me to take things like this seriously.
Wow, somebody that day was salty, and pretty much just looking for a comment to get mad about.
There’s another FOSS project idea: a bot that detects Lemmy bans and sends you a notification about it.
Another idea, take the mod log and allow voting on mod actions in a way that makes unpopular ones more visible. Give the users tools to evaluate moderators and admins to speed up the process of removing bad mods or users discovering they shouldn’t bother with an instance with bad admins. Or, with a different sorting method, it could highlight mods that aren’t power tripping losers.
Maybe a similar system for reporting, since it wouldn’t surprise me if some mods feel like they need to act because of pressure from losers who power trip with the report button. You know, the kind that feels the need to inform people they’ve been reported.
well you could just make a lemmy community about spurious bans and people could vote on it, and you could tag them in the comments somewhere….
Blahaj is essentially the padded room of Lemmy. The users there never ever ever want to see a difference in opinion, a naughty word, or a thought provoking comment. They want to be victims and talk about cute stuff. Completely within their rights to make their instance the most cringe thing on the Internet and yet another example of leftists fighting other leftists and pointing fingers at one another over minor issues while conservatives actually are exterminating minorities at record pace and creating laws and regulations to destroy lives. It might be funny if it wasn’t so sad.
Thought that was Beehaw?
Definitely more beehaw. They don’t like when other instances don’t follow their rules…
I’ve had nothing but thoughtful and pleasant interactions with users from Beehaw, so what’s the tea with them?
Weren’t they the ones who defederate any instance that allows the word “poop”?
I…have no idea? I don’t really know any Lemmy lore outside of that time everyone was posting beans. But my instance doesn’t ban “poop” and I can clearly see Beehaw, so probably not.
Is there a lemmy version of r/subredditdrama? Because that would be helpful lol
Not literally but aren’t they the ones that basically don’t federate with anyone because they have the moderation policies of Nick Jr and allow basically nothing more scandalous than “If You’re Happy And You Know It” in?
Again, I don’t know. My instance seems to be fine with them, and I wouldn’t say it’s Nick Jr here. I also just see the same news/tech/whatever posts on Beehaw as the ones on .world or whatever, so I don’t even know what the content difference would be.
But now I’m just even more curious about any potential mod/admin drama regarding these defederations, damn it.
I came over fairly early during the Rexodus and a lot of the scuttlebutt was about Beehaw defederating basically anyone who had an open sign-up policy, which includes sh.itjust.works.
They ban anyone for being a dick.
As is their right to? Like the whole point of Beehaw is to foster a positive environment. I’ve disagreed with many people there (including their admin, I’m pretty sure) without getting banned.
Sure, but this community is full of ban baiters and dicks looking for validation.
So a marginalized group that gets continuously shit on both offline and irl makes a lemmy community with strict rules so they can have a space to enjoy lemmy and take a break from being shat on… and you have a problem with it? Why does all online activity have to be productive? Why can’t people make safe space to relax in?
Never said anywhere I had a problem.
"It’s completely within their rights, but I’m still going to make a paragraph-long complaint about it, even though it doesn’t affect me.’
Ah yes, echo chambers have never had disatrous consequences for people outside of them. Brilliant.
deleted by creator
It seems to be an unintentional side effect, that ends up being similar to a shadow ban.
What I mean to say is that I can still make comments on blahaj posts, but they will never show up to users of their instance. So, to me, it seems like everything is okay, when in reality, I’ve probably been commenting into the ether for 10 mo.
Example:
It’s not like a shadow ban. It’s just a normally instance ban. A shadowban is by definition invisible to to the affected party. This is very much immediately visible through the modlog.
My greater point is that it’s dishonest to liken this to a shadow ban due to the secretive connotations of the latter and the way this paints the admins who gave it out
Most users don’t habitually check the modlog, let alone of every individual instance they engage with. It has pretty much been invisible to me for the last 10 mo, and I’ve commented here and there multiple times on blahaj posts in that timeframe, with no immediate indication I had been banned.
Seems to fit the definition to me.
So your argument is that because a modlog entry exists for the ban, nothing else about how it is applied matters? That’s a little obtuse imo. I have seen several users claiming not to even know the modlog exists and being thrilled to learn about it. For many users, it’s a small link in the footer they never noticed. Users don’t get a notification about bans and if the end result is your comments appear to show up for you but not others, that definitely meets the normal definition of a shadowban. Lemmy could introduce some new features(s) to help with that but in the meantime it’s absolutely reasonable to see how a user would interpret things this way. I’ve been on Lemmy over a year and I’m just now finding out this is possible so I wouldn’t say it’s the fault of the user for not understanding how it works.
Lemmy lacking moderation notifications in the UI or email notification backend doesn’t make it a shadowban, if they were absent from the modlog and didn’t put the banned flag on your profile then that would be a shadowban. They didn’t make an attempt to hide it from you, the communication methods are just very poor right now, there is a reason why Lemmy is on version 0.19.3 or 0.19.8 for the later instances, this is still considered alpha software, it’s not finished. The jank is to be expected for a software in its infancy.
I mean, I was saying what it seems like, not what it is. The user unfriendliness leads to confusion. And yes I understand software takes time, development is what I do for a living. I was just saying it’s reasonable to feel like you have been shadowbanned given the circumstances
My point is that that instance admins didn’t intend it as a “shadow ban”, but as a normal lemmy ban for someone they don’t believe deserves a platform towards their instance membership. Therefore insisting on calling it “a shadow ban” when most people understand that term to be something else than an instance ban, is egregious and misleading with the aim of revenge.
Sure, lemmy could introduce notifications, In fact, since the modlogs are public, this could be done by any frontend. But it’s still doesn’t mean that the admins tried to shadow ban someone.
Well my comment made clear that it wasn’t about intent but rather a reasonable interpretation.
In response to your edit, I don’t particularly care about how this post paints an admin that would call me a transphobe and instance ban me, over the singular given comment and the context in which it was made.
Any instance admin can ban users who are toxic to their instance member. Calling all these completely normal bans “shadow bans” is disingenuous.
It doesn’t matter if this is Lemmy’s default behavior. Allowing users to post comments that cannot be viewed by anyone in the receiving community is shadowbanning, regardless of whether Lemmy puts that label on it.
I would argue that’s the fault of the frontend not informing the user that they’re banned, and not a shadow banning.
That’s about the least egregious part of it all, but noted. I’m still going to refer to it as shadow banning, because it makes no difference to me that it’s technically a misgiving of the Lemmy platform.
Sure but your argument loses credence and is also confusing since most people have something more egregious and underhanded when talking about shadow bans. You’re being deliberately misleading in order to hurt the reputation of said admins more.
Shadow. Banning.
The notion that his comment was “toxic” is objectively ludicrous.
deleted by creator
In that case the word “toxic” should not have been used, especially in the way it was used “ban users who are toxic to their instance members” (emphasys mine) rather than “ban users who they think are toxic to their instance members”, as the former implies that the OP is “toxic” rather than that specific Admin conclude (possibly all by themselves) the OP was toxic.
Even if “toxic” had been used in a way that conveyed the message that in this case a person’s “toxicity” was the determination of an Admin (human opinion, rather than some kind of neutral process), I think one of the points that is being made is that for certain Admins, the barrier to ban is a lot lower than “toxic”.
deleted by creator
Compare with the thread as it appears on their instance.
