I saw this post titled “Scratch a anti-harm reductionist and a fascist bleeds” (https://lemmy.world/post/33320759)
I commented that “harm reduction” apparently means sending billions in weapons to israel while they commit genocide and shutting down campus protests speaking out against that genocide. I said that seemed pretty fascist to me.
Within an instant, they downvoted my post and banned me. Guess it’s my fault for posting in a circlejerk community, but I’m still scratching my head on how that makes me a tankie. Something tells me this mod would be calling in the tanks to suppress any dissent if they could.
PTB, I don’t see the tankie connections either.
Thank you for obtaining my comment! I couldn’t find it in the modlog and didn’t know how else to get it, so I had to recall what I wrote from memory.
They probably banned you with content removal, that doesn’t generate modlog entries (Lemmy 0.19 anyway, 1.0 will generate these)
Oh good. They’re fixing that. Mods were taking advantage of that bug far too often.
It’s a bug. Mods aren’t doing it intentionally, and most dislike it as much as everyone else.
Seconded. This is a perfectly normal and reasonable response. anyone who thinks Israel isn’t committing a genocide is either ignorant, a troll, or malicious
Looks like @[email protected] has been going on a rampage against people who are critical of Israel lately, PTB for sure.
@[email protected] Might want to kick this mod out of your community since he’s poisoning it for others and kicking out people he shouldn’t be.
Yeah it’s not a good look that Tankie now means “I don’t like genocide”. Just further dissolves the word’s meaning and enables .ml and hexbear to do more things.
Yeah it’s not a good look that Tankie now means “I don’t like genocide”.
It’s what it’s meant on lemmy, particularly .world, for a while now. centrists just use it like (other) republicans use “woke.”
It means “this person has an opinion I know I’m morally wrong about. I don’t want to change my position but I also don’t want to look bad, so I’ll pick a term I can’t define and use it as a cudgel against them.”
I’ve been called a Tankie for wanting the Democrats to support trans rights to win against Trump.
Means nothing in 2025.
enables .ml and hexbear to do more things.
Making us sound so nefarious, and I’m only a little evil. The word tankie has definitely been getting worn out to the point of being the centrist equivalent of chuds calling people “woke”
What things are we malevolent tankies going to do, aside from voicing our opinions in the fediverse? Enforce authoritarian bedtime?
I wish you would because I’ll never get to bed at a reasonable hour otherwise.
Oh no!
That’s a bit reductionist
That’s a bit reductionist
But only a bit.
Well when people get banned for being anti-genocide and war as “Tankie” what does it mean?
It means that someone is being allowed to mod who shouldn’t be.
I don’t know, I didn’t ban anyone for that reason. I’ve since unbanned the users who were banned for those reasons and have cleared the air with Pug that this is inappropriate moderation.
Hope he learns this lesson but don’t expect him to forgive you or anyone else for it.
Looks like @[email protected] has been going on a rampage against people who are critical of Israel lately, PTB for sure.
Lately?
This is the second post in a row here about his actions.
I’ll investigate later, thanks for the ping. I’ve since unbanned some of the users, such as @[email protected], the others I’m still investigating and some are also spam
I’m fine with people sharing different views, even if they’re controversial. Tankies are also allowed to comment in the community, as long as everyone follows the rules and is mutually respectful towards each other, feel free to engage.
Wasn’t gonna bother until after I saw this, but looks like PJ gave me a ban for clarifying UN reporting on sexual assault.
Didn’t think I was posting anything spicy but you never know the crowd.
That sounds like .word mods, banning people for proving them wrong.
Yea, seems likely
That bucket guy said ‘rape of Jews on October 7th was widespread’, and the ‘widespread’ part fucking got to me.
Not that it’s a huge difference but I couldn’t stand that guy running around citing that UN report that said it found ‘reasonable grounds to believe sexual violence occurred’, which is a fucking far cry from ‘rape was widespread’
But, if I were to be charitable, i could see a mod coming in cold to that conversation just assuming the worst. But im pretty sure it was pug, if the ‘sort by mod’ function is accurate.
It most likely is, check this community. He’s banned people for calling him out on unrelated communities .
Pug is mentally unwell and lashes out at people wanting something better in the world.
I’ve had some heated exchanges with pug in the past but this is the first time I can say for sure he’s moderated me, and for something extraordinarily tame.
The genociders have produced zero evidence for any rape.
Except their own OCIf only that actually mattered.
truth matters
The banhammer is a disagree button.
The majority of bans in meanwhileongrad are temporary with the exception of trolls and alt accounts
You were banned for using semantic arguments that rapes occurred.
The UN is not a judicial body and cannot unilaterally define criminal offences within sovereign states. The UN can, however, assist and fund independent bodies to investigate, which found reasonable grounds that Hamas raped women during the 7th of October massacres.
So arguing that the UN wasn’t verbatim with what the user, @[email protected], said is a bad-faith position to take, it’s handwaving away that the rapes occurred and implying that the UN is a judicial body.
Basing the entirety of your argument on ‘Well, not ALL of them were raped’ is a pretty disgusting stance that handwaves atrocities, which is in violation of the Apologia and Revisionism rule. Your ban was made permanent, and you weren’t warned beforehand, which I’m not happy with, so I can unban you within 24 hours if you so desire and if you follow the rules in the future.
I’m also not interested in arguing about the validity of the rapes either because it’s not relevant to the thread at hand.
I was addressing someone saying that ‘rapes of jewish women were widespread’, which to my ears is an unfounded characterization of a report which went to great lengths not to say anything half as definitive. If anyone in that thread was guilty of apologia or revisionism, it sure as fuck wasn’t me.
But you’re right, this isn’t the place to argue about it. Do what you want.
I’ll unban ya since you weren’t given a warning
Removed by mod
Sorry what was that?
Just when I thought Antiyanks had finally gotten a life, here they are to prove me wrong.
By the way if Lemmy-UI doesn’t let you remove the mod, use photon or Tesseract to do it.
@[email protected] , could you maybe add a “ban reserved” or something in the title?
Why? The ban was reversed by a different person. Edit to the main post would be more appropriate if anything. His main point stands, PJ is unhinged.
Hm, good point
Idk, if he didn’t kick our pj before why would goat do it now.
Pug and I had a falling out, and he stepped down but retained his moderator role. If you check the modlog you can see he hasn’t acted in quite a while until just recently
Why not remove him if he’s causing more issues for you?
I’ll consider it
Having an unhinged narcissist as a mod is not ideal for any community.
Honestly my bet is PJ is kept on the team despite all of this.
He’s been removed
I agree, and I’m sure you’re as critical of Davel as you are as Pug.
No idea who Davel is but I have seen numerous bans by PugJesus recently for made up reasons. Usually “tankie” etiquette, by which he means anyone left of center, quite literally. Sometimes “sexual assault denier” by which he means people disagreeing with Israeli propaganda lies. To makes it worse he bans in unrelated communities because someone disagreed with him.
He is not capable of being a moderator.
Removed by mod
PTB
PugJesus should not be in charge of anything more than his own diaper.
He accused me of being a “tankie” when I criticised Israeli propaganda lies.
Removed by mod
Associating anti-genocide with tankies is a tactic.
The libs don’t like to be called tankies so it’s used to scare them off anti-genocide comments.
Very similar of associating anti-genocide with antisemitism.
Cheap hasbara tricks.
looks at the op of the post you commented on
Yep, Power tripping Bastard alright. Any criticism of Israeli genocide and the politicians he supports that fund it “Tankie behavior”.
Even though most liberals in America are against it.
PTB.
Setting aside the question of your true ideology, I don’t think people should be banned for their ideology. Bans should be based on behavior.
Ironically I hate tankies as much as anyone and I’m having a big fight with one right now but I still think they should be allowed to participate on the same footing as everyone as long as they follow the rules.
Edit: after reading further this is even worse because the rules are actually pretty much in line with my position. Tankies are explicitly allowed to participate as long as they follow the rules. So this isn’t even supported by anything other than impotent mod rage.
Ideology to some extent is behavior, or at least helps determine behavior, when people act in a manner consistent with their own ideological positions. I can see an appeal to “allow all ideas as long as they don’t make trouble”, but when the nature of most ideologies is to include something along the lines of “it is a morally good thing to spread this ideology to other people” to a lesser or greater extent, and some ideologies require harmful behavior for one to act consistently with it, the conclusion that seems obvious to me is that believing in certain ideologies is itself bad enough behavior for it to be justifiable to exclude those people from a given online community, because such a person will either cause trouble or be a hypocrite. And after all, ideology isn’t some immutable inherit trait, a person can change one’s ideology and people often do.
All that being said, that particular statement isn’t really a clear statement of ideology at all. I disagree with it’s implication, but all it really does is demonstrate either a misunderstanding of what harm reduction means, or a viewpoint that is too black-and-white to allow for it, which can be a feature of too many ideological positions to narrow it down.
Yeah, I absolutely agree with you. [email protected] allows Tankies to comment and engage, some of them do, but only if they follow the rules.
Most of the time they don’t bother with the community though because their views and extremism don’t hold up to scrutiny.
Most of the time they don’t bother with the community though because their views and extremism don’t hold up to scrutiny.
I’m sure it’s not because of the mods’ behavior.
The modlog is open, and the majority of bans are temporary, you can verify it yourself
I’ve interacted with your fellow mod plenty in the past to know everything he’s about.
He shrieks “tankie” at everyone who disagrees with him, particularly at anyone who disagrees with his support for netanyahu’s genocide. And you made sure he got to keep his banhammer to use as a disagree button.
He shrieks “tankie” at everyone who disagrees with him, particularly at anyone who disagrees with his support for netanyahu’s genocide
Don’t forget screaming fascist for wanting Democrats to win against Trump like he did to @[email protected]
And I’ve since reversed those bans and reminded him of the rules. if you have something with him, take it up with him.
And I’ve since reversed those bans and reminded him of the rules.
He’s not going to stop banning people for disliking genocide.
if you have something with him, take it up with him.
I have. Got me banned from most of startrek.website. He got super pissed off when I said that centrists hate communists so much because they’re still salty about the fall of berlin.
Well we’ll just have to wait and see then
And that’s how you end up with a Nazi bar.
Yeah I’ve heard the proverb but I think it’s not that hard to set behavior based rules that exclude Nazis.
Of course not, but what about the other Nazi-adjacent pieces of shit like Tankies?
Sadly some fash boot lickers are fine with a Tankie-Bar.
Had to laugh a bit at your modlog history of trying to dictate who are the bad trans vs the good trans.
No one is bad trans.
Tankies are bad people.
well I’m just going to continuing hanging out at the bad kids table since there’s a ton of trans people on hexbear.
The nice thing about .ml is I get to be federated with both blahaj and hexbear, I’m a centrist like that.
Average horseshoe theorist. Previously.
Are you a “tankie”? Or is that mod just such a turbolib that they think you must be a tankie if you’re farther left than blue maga?
The mod never elaborated, but based on their behavior, I assume the latter.
That’s a… weirdly noncommittal answer.
I’m not a tankie, but I don’t know why the mod thinks of me as a tankie.
It basically says “I am not sure, I am not a Tankie, I think it is the second one.”
If you call out genocide, you’re a Tankie.
If you defend genocide, you’re valid and will win the election now!
that mod just such a turbolib that they think you must be a tankie if you’re farther left than blue maga
It’s that one. Perfect description of pj
How can the mod be a turbolib when he claims to be “vaguely leftist”? /s
Maybe he’s simply lying, but I suspect it’s that he’s oblivious to or suppressing his own unexamined political positions.
One of the c/MeanwhileOnGrad mods is a power poster who permabans anyone as a “tankie” for making even the mildest of criticisms. Ironic for someone so vociferous about “authoritarianism.”
lol
lmao even
Jesus
90% of that content is cm0002. Lol
Seems like mods at .ml got some competition on “Who wants to be a power tripping mod?”, eh?
awwww, now thats a valid drama queen
Hey drama queen do you recognise the genocide the Uyghurs?
If there’s evidence that isn’t entirely filtered through one German fundamentalist who doesn’t even speak the language I’ll consider it.
Absolutely wild to still be pushing this narrative from the first Trump admin when Gaza is getting leveled and starved en masse though.
This may come as a shock to you, but some people have the mental capacity to be concerned about more than one thing at a time.
why be bringing mental capacity into this?
I’m definitely biased as someone living in US though. The country I’m living in is participating in a genocide so I’m going to be a lot more concerned about that.
China has plenty of issues without needing to go through a German fundamentalist on a “mission from god” against China.
Removed by mod
That is wild, coming from you.
I always suspected this guy was continuously posting historical memes and artifacts to, at times, post his own revisionist agenda. No wonder he’s a power tripping mod too.
deleted by creator
PugJesus gets extremely triggered by the phrase “statch a liberal and a fascist bleeds”.
Literally. He finds that statement inherently incorrect while he defends genocide, transphobia, excuses racism from the party he likes, and hates communists and socialists.
He’s been scratched and wants to make sure everyone knows.
He’s a vile POS
deleted by creator
What other posts would you like to see on Meanwhileongrad? I mean, the community is dedicated to posting examples of extremism from tankies throughout Lemmy and the developers themselves.
So we’re all agreed at this point in the drama circle that PhilipTheBucket is one of his alts, right?
I got into an argument with pug like 3 days ago (over an admittedly hot take of mine, which he screenshotted and shared in the same community)
In came Phil to play the good cop but ultimately ended up being the exact same type of troll, as I interpreted it then. At least he had the exact same type of antagonistic bad faith interpretation of my words.
Good to know I’m not the only one to think something weird was going on with them. If they aren’t the same person, they sure share the same online schedule and biases a lot.
Phil has lied for Pug, so they’re definitely in some kind of kahoots.
Personally my interactions with the two of them make me doubt this.
Though with both the conversations did spiral into a huge thread, and although they do share a lot of opinions, the behavior in those conversations was different enough to give me pause on jumping to this conclusion.
Yeah I really don’t think they are the same person.
I personally see more similarity between philip and cm0002, but who knows.
I find them all fucking tiresome and tell them to their face. Only on the drama shit tho, I love the effort they put into content generally. I should clarify.
He’s just a shithead who sides with a abusers, not the same but at least a useful idiot.
Nah, they have very similar worldviews and argument styles but I’m pretty sure they’re distinct people. I’ve pissed off PugJesus and gotten personally blocked by them but I haven’t irritated PhilipTheBucket to that point yet___ on this account.
Possibly. Or at least the same type of idiots.
I’ve removed them
Thank you for letting us know
Thank you!
How can someone that likes Snatcher be bad?
PTB. Libs are obsessed with tankies. Different sides of same imperial coin.
(FWIW: I was really hating on tankies before the genocide of palestinians. At that time tankies were focused on supporting the invasion of ukraine… But in the past two years tankies have really outshined the libs and exposed their support for genocide. That’s part of why libs are so mad. They would rather cry about their loser election than admit their complete failure and oppose genocide.)
I don’t know who you’re trying to convince
I have no input about the original ban, but I was curious and glanced at your profile:
I have only one credit card which I charge everything to (credit limit is more than enough at over $10k) and which I pay off in full each month and have no absolutely debt, therefore my credit score is absolute dogshit.
That’s not how credit scores and credit cards work. You would already need an excellent credit score to get the $10k limit in the first place, but on top of that having a credit line open in the specific form of a consumer credit card, charging a lot to it, and then consistently paying it off, is pretty much the textbook way to get an excellent credit score. I can’t off the top of my head think of a way to get a better one. The reason is that that specific way winds up funneling a pretty significant amount of money to the credit card companies every month, but exposing them to very little risk, and that’s precisely their favorite thing in the world.
Why are you lying about this unimportant point? Like I say, it’s not related to anything about the original ban, but it’s a weird thing to lie about.
Hi Philip we’ve already talked about our policy on bad-jacketing people, and especially so on such flimsy “evidence”. It’s also completely off topic and ad hominem to boot. Just because you are camouflaging your accusations behind innuendo like this…
Why would I lie about this?
You tell me.
… doesn’t mean that its not bad-jacketing. Please follow the spirit of our instance rules in future.
Please follow the spirit of our instance rules in future.
Oh, absolutely. Yes, sir.
You should probably use they/them to refer to them.
How is it relevant, exactly?
Removed by mod
It’s more relevant to the conversation here of “are they worth banning because of bad faith behavior” than it is to the conversation about credit scores.
I don’t think the moderator’s dismissive language “known tankie” is really accurate or productive, even if the mod has some kind of awareness of a history of bad-faith behavior. But, it’s relevant to the ban if they have a history of bad-faith behavior, and whether they’re lying about stuff has relevance to that.
I realize I’m stepping into and increasing a whole tribal “tankie vs liberal” civil war here by weighing in, which maybe isn’t a good idea. Banning someone simply because they’re a tankie, I don’t agree with, if that’s the real reason, it’s PTB. If that is some kind of careless insulting code for some other behavior which is the actual issue, I think they should say that. But the issue from my comment is just the first thing that jumped out at me looking at the YPTB question, and I thought it definitely might be relevant and so I decided to speak on it.
You’re right in that my credit score was decent enough to get that credit limit, but I’ve only been charging <$1000 a month (usually <$300) on it and my credit score has only dropped since. I was surprised by the drop and requested a detailed credit report but found no accounts open/delinquent that would indicate someone destroying my credit.
You put everything on the credit card, but also, your usual expenses on the credit card are <$300 per month?
Also why’d you say the score was now dogshit, if all you meant was that it dropped by the tiny amount that the situation you described would cause it to drop (even if your general expenses had dropped to usually <$300 per month for some reason)?
It might seem kind of unrelated, but I have to say I’m a little bit leaning towards whatever judgement it was that led to someone banning you, just because of this situation. It seems kind of plausible that you might have other weird posting behaviors if you tend to casually lie about random things… but also I can’t really say I understand it fully since I don’t understand the reason for the lie really. It’s just such a weird thing to lie about. It is objectively impossible for what you said to be true, though…
My living expenses are low and some of the larger transactions are paid direct from my bank account to avoid credit card fees. My score didn’t drop a tiny amount, it dropped by about 100 points, which is why I requested a detailed credit report. Why would I lie about this?
It’s probably going up and down a lot because of credit utilization.
If you don’t have a lot of credit ($10,000 isn’t very high) and you’re using up to 10% ($1000/$10000) every month then you’ll appear to be highly leveraged on credit.
If you had $50000 in total credit and used up to $1000 of it every month then that’s only 2% credit utilization.
Also, you have been exceptionally patient with someone interrogating you over something entirely unrelated to your original post.
you’re using up to 10% ($1000/$10000) every month then you’ll appear to be highly leveraged on credit
Hi! I have some helpful feedback for you. Just to help you understand how credit cards work.
10% is what this person refers to as the “sweet spot.” They recommend keeping it under 30% or you may get actual significant penalties. Lower than 10% may be useful if you want to get every last point of credit score, but there’s no universe where 10% would be “highly leveraged.”
I definitely value your input as to my interrogations, and total unreasonableness. Please understand, my goal is purely to share knowledge about credit cards specifically, and definitely not to accuse this poster at this point of anything in particular.
I’m so glad my country doesn’t use credit scores. Getting punished for utilization sounds cursed. If the limit is 10k, you should be able to use those 10k, not 1-2k, before penalties apply.
You’re not being helpful, but you are being patronizing and pedantic about my phrasing, just like you were with OP.
As a great man once said, " You’re a constipator, Peanut. You disturb my shit, and that’s annoying."
Though I do suppose I owe you a thank you as I was surprised to see a reply from you. I thought I had blocked you yesterday. So, thank you for reminding me to rectify my lapse and block you now.
You’re not being helpful, but you are being patronizing and pedantic
Being implies a temporary condition.
That’s a really great point! I’ll try to be less patronizing in the future, that’s helpful feedback, thank you.
This tangent you’ve been dragged on is so, so irrelevant to the thread, but I wanted to chime in with a couple bits of info that might be genuinely helpful to try to counterbalance the “lmao u doin it wrong and lyin” troll
First - Even if you pay your statements in full to avoid interest charges, the amount of utilization on the card at the time the report is made to the credit bureau is what affects your score. As silly as it seems, even 10% utilization can bring your score down. I have seen it recommended to stay under 8% or around 6%. So one thing you could do is make a payment a couple days before your statement period ends to fine-tune the balance down to something that will look attractive on your credit report. If you are already able to pay things off in full, this should be doable with minimal shuffling around. Utilization doesn’t have “memory” so one bad month is not going to drag your score down for a long time.
Second - If you have or can get a credit card with a decent cashback or rewards program, you might be able to put some of those larger transactions on the credit card and come out ahead even with the fees. This is going to be highly sensitive to the specifics though and the card usually needs to have no annual fees or it eliminates the possibility.
“lmao u doin it wrong and lyin” troll
Rude
As silly as it seems, even 10% utilization can bring your score down. I have seen it recommended to stay under 8% or around 6%.
This is objectively wrong, for this situation.
“And I think the best practice here is to try to keep your utilization under 30%,” O’Leary said. “But I think the sweet spot is 10%, or even less than 10%.”
If you have a $300 balance on a $10k limit card, you will not lose anything off your rating. If you have a $1000 balance on a $10k limit card, you might lose a tiny amount compared to having a 0 balance, but it won’t be all that much (some fraction of the 3/10 of your credit rating that is determined by how much credit you’re using), and you will as you noted regain it as soon as you pay that balance. Having a 10% credit utilization will in no universe take you from “qualified for a $10k credit line” to “dogshit.”
Second - If you have or can get a credit card with a decent cashback or rewards program, you might be able to put some of those larger transactions on the credit card and come out ahead even with the fees. This is going to be highly sensitive to the specifics though and the card usually needs to have no annual fees or it eliminates the possibility.
This part is accurate. Basically anything that doesn’t charge you a separate fee for using a CC, you should use a card for, because most cards will kick back part of their processing fees to you in the form of rewards.
My score didn’t drop a tiny amount, it dropped by about 100 points
So from “excellent” to “still excellent, but lower.” Mine was high 700s at one point and I couldn’t get above a $4k limit and I tried.
My living expenses are low and some of the larger transactions are paid direct from my bank account to avoid credit card fees.
You’re not from the US, are you.
Which is fine, but why would you be pretending to be? Why not just say “I’m not really familiar with what normal living expenses and credit limits are in the US, or how the credit and banking system works there, because I don’t live there and never have, which is why I never made any kind of post about how my US credit score is right now”?
Semi-expecting for me to get some kind of heat from the moderators for this line of inquiry BTW lol. That is honestly the only explanation I can see for it, though. Maybe I am wrong and there is some other explanation.
Why would I lie about this?
You tell me.
Believe whatever you want to believe. I briefly considered posting my credit score history graph from my bank, but I really have no reason to try to prove anything to you and you’d probably excuse it with something else like “why are you lying about missed payments?” or “you could’ve easily faked this graph” or some other explanation. I shared my experience with the credit score system (yes, in the US) and that’s that.
I really have no reason to try to prove anything to you
You don’t owe me any explanation or proof of anything, no. I’m mostly raising an issue for the awareness of anyone else reading, and giving you a chance to explain and defend your comments and claims if you want to.
Cool. While you’re digging around my comment history, why not dig up a comment where I’m a tankie saying tankie things? That would be a lot more relevant.
You want to throw them in a lake and see if they float or sink too?
Bad faith ad hominems from dirt-digging are obnoxious, and this one especially so, because it’s so blatant and such thin gruel.
Why are you snooping around in someone’s comment history for irrelevant gotchas?
Oh right. Someone criticized pugjesus and it personally offended you.
Phil recently said he was unaware of Pug being a moderator anywhere, but is active wher Pug mods, and even talks to them about moderation.
I wonder why…
I’ve seen a lot of talk about Philip going to great lengths to defend PJ no matter what, but this is the first time I’ve seen it firsthand. And… yikes. They were not kidding.
Really just embarrassing on both ends.
