It is obvious that you and I see the screenshotted conversation very differently from one another.
I don’t think FlyingSquid should have sent one rude message to that one user that one time, no. I don’t see that as any kind of abuse of power.
I think I’ve said about as much as I want to say about this situation at this point.
Oh no! What happened after saroh was banned?
It would be silly if your case for “abuse of power” was that two months ago, FlyingSquid sent one rude message to one user because he made a mistake, so I know it’s not that.
So, no citations for abuse of power? Just that they had a disagreement with someone in Discord?
It is not misinformation to say that Kamala Harris is the commander in chief of the largest military force in the world and she is overseeing a genocide.
That is textbook misinformation.
The linkage of Kamala Harris with the genocide in Gaza, persistently and disingenuously, with an apparently-successful outcome of greatly increasing the genocide by putting Trump in charge instead, is one major type of misinformation on Lemmy. If you were coming and saying “It is not misinformation to say that Kamala Harris hasn’t even condemned the genocide and is losing Arab voters because of her attempt to waffle on this crystal-clear issue,” then that wouldn’t be misinformation, whether I agreed with it personally or not. But going off into factual la-la land in order to accomplish your political goals for any particular discussion is absolutely misinformation. Thank you for providing a good example.
Blackbeard had the option to clearly say, “We want to allow people to say any bad thing about the Democrats that they want, even if it seems clearly disingenuous or like a pattern on the part of that particular user. We don’t consider that to be misinformation.” That would have clarified things and my guess is that FlyingSquid wouldn’t have argued with it. Blackbeard’s desire to tiptoe around saying that directly, for obvious reasons, and just say “be more discerning,” was what led to FlyingSquid’s confusion which Blackbeard for some reason interpreted as being hostile and obstinate about it.
It’s like a flashback to every boss who gives unclear direction about expectations, even when giving you a bollocking about how you did it wrong this time and even when asked point-blank. Except, FlyingSquid isn’t getting paid to put up with it, hence the “I think I just won’t participate then” which is probably a lot more polite than I would have been about it.
If you want some insight, check this user’s comments and sort by controversial. Then do the same for FlyingSquid.
Have some citations for that abuse of authority? OP alluded to abuse of authority by pointing out various powers FlyingSquid has, but in my mind very tellingly didn’t actually provide any examples of abuse of authority. The screenshotted conversation, where a person with some site admin powers is reporting things as a regular user, and then when a mod gets really hostile and insulting with them, simply says “Oh, okay, I think I just won’t participate in your stuff then, if my presence is unwanted,” doesn’t exactly paint the picture of some kind of power-mad petulant tyrant.
Full disclosure, I tend to agree with FlyingSquid in the instance that kicked all of this off. I don’t have a clear opinion of them as a mod, but personally I wish the LW mods would do a lot more about the “Kamala Harris = Hitler” type of misinformation that gets a free pass on a lot of LW.
FlyingSquid comes across as perfectly reasonable in this conversation. Their arguments that another mod thanked them for reporting stuff, that it’s two reports over the course of two weeks which is hardly excessive, and then when the two people couldn’t see eye to eye, they said they just wouldn’t flag anything, sounds all perfectly reasonable and sensible. For some reason that wasn’t okay, and the conversation got personal, with Blackbeard constantly posting these aggrieved attacks about how FlyingSquid was being childish if he didn’t continue to report things in someone else’s community occasionally, but never anything that the mods there thought was not worthy of removal. And then petulantly refusing to say something along the lines of, “Of course you’re welcome to post there if you want” when asked repeatedly if it was okay for them to just post and participate still.
I haven’t seen any Discord harassment, so maybe I missed something, but if this is what gets posted as justification for why FlyingSquid is a terrible moderator, I suspect that the “harassment” is more of the same. Maybe it’s along the lines of “not saying exactly what I want you to say, or having conversation with other people where you say things I don’t want you to say.” People are allowed to disagree with each other over what is misinformation, or choose not to report content in someone else’s community if they get some hostile responses when they do. Trying to order someone else around and then getting personally insulting with them when they politely tell you “No, I don’t agree with how you see it,” is ridiculous.
Yeah, could be. The other thing I thought of was maybe there’s something about sorting by “Active” that means that my comment pushes it up into being seen by more people, and that’s why there are more comments when that happens.
It’s just odd, though. The flurry of responses that come in-between a stable “fuck the Democrats” narrative at the top of the comments, and another “fuck the Democrats” narrative at the top of the comments, aren’t really any kind of disagreement with me. It’s just other top-level comments and random conversation. I would have to be able to show a little snapshot of how the comments looked at different points in time to really put across what it is about it that makes it seem really weird to me, honestly.
Yeah, sounds about right.
It’s so weird. It’s like a mad libs that only comes up with one answer.
“US Government fucked something up again because of course they did.”
“Let’s n͟o͟t͟ ͟v͟o͟t͟e͟ ͟f͟o͟r͟ ͟D͟e͟m͟o͟c͟r͟a͟t͟s͟!”
Like yeah, Biden did some unexpectedly good stuff on the climate, and some standard Democrat stuff which definitely isn’t great. This is part of the latter. I’m not even sure it matters, since Trump will be in charge of implementing this treaty so it was DOA anyway, but regardless of that: Did you guys forget the real life Nazis are going to be in charge in a couple of months? It’s going to take a ton of work to even have elections in four years that we can not-vote-for-Democrats in, let alone some good progressive change to keep pushing the Democrats towards something resembling a decent environmental policy. Just not voting, and then sitting back all satisifed like “that oughta do it,” is such a mind-boggling strategy… and yet it’s the one that always gets consistent airplay.
Turning against the corporate Democrats, because their environmental policies are bad, will not get them replaced by something better. Turning against the corporate Democrats will probably result in one-party rule by the Republicans for a generation, with horrors environmental and domestic the likes of which no one of this generation has witnessed.
I would also apply that exact same thing to the breed of Nancy Pelosi Democrats that wants to hang the progressive wing of the party out to dry. It seems like after a few days of panic after the election, everyone forgot what we’re in for. We need allies at this stage. Or we will all hang separately, and like that.
Everyone’s been ignoring it and discouraging dissent against them on Lemmy
This narrative that “everyone” on Lemmy loves the Democrats is very weird. You can deal head-on with what I’m saying, it is fine, you don’t need to agree with me. But the “Democrats aren’t great” consensus on Lemmy is not exactly a persecuted minority, please don’t try to introduce a narrative that they are.
I noticed something weird about the comments here.
20 minutes after the post, treefrog posted his comment defining a “Fuck the Democrats … I’m done voting for them” narrative. I’ve noticed that a lot of topics on Lemmy get tied back to not voting for the Democrats.
There then followed about an hour of, basically, silence, with that “Fuck the Democrats” comment as the top comment. Then I posted my response, disagreeing with treefrog.
After that, the next hour or so featured, not 0 comments like the previous hour, but 4 different comments. The only comments that got made, outside of my discussion with treefrog, were:
The total result is that the top two comments say “Fuck the Biden administration” and “Fuck the Democrats”, and then there’s general less focused conversation after that. The narrative is back, in these comments, that the right response to this is not to vote for the Democrats.
Maybe this sounds like conspiracy theory rock, but I’ve noticed this pattern before, where there’s a “fuck the Democrats” narrative in the top comments, with the comments otherwise being quiet, and if something changes that narrative among the top comments, there’s a little flurry of activity until the narrative is reestablished, and then things quiet down again.
Maybe I’m nuts. It definitely was notable to me, though. Especially given the weirdness of reacting to this particular story by instantly reaching for “Let’s not vote for Democrats anymore!” as the solution to environmental problems. Like… out of all the strategies or reactions you could have, that’s the first one that comes to mind?
Edit: Clarifications
Edit 2: The person who reported this for “incivility”… lol.
You mentioned a lot of strategies we can use to fight for what we want, and then said that none of those will work.
No, I said all of those will work, to some degree. Even refusing to vote within a targeted framework, where you’re demanding certain concessions in exchange for your vote as part of an organized coalition, putting effective pressure on the party to make specific changes, is a pretty good strategy. It’s how some key environmental legislation has gotten passed in decades past.
Letting Democrats know that they can’t buy my vote with corporate campaign donations, is me fighting for what I want.
In exactly the same way that refusing to touch the steering wheel until the car starts going a better direction is fighting not to crash the car.
Advocate for environmental groups? Give grief to the Democratic party, try to extract concessions from them, since they can at least be bargained with on environmental issues, where the Republicans literally want to have the environmental groups shot by the National Guard? Support particular independent candidates, inside or outside the Democratic party? Advocate for voting reform that gives third parties a realistic chance, to put pressure on the Democrats?
Nope. It’s just “Let’s do the Republicans.” In the current system, that’s what will happen if you don’t vote for Democrats. Changing that system sounds great, but disengaging entirely isn’t the way to do that.
At a broad foundational level, the American system is based on this: Concentrations of money and power will always attract corruption and tyranny. Always. It’s just how government works. The Democrats are like that, the Republicans are like that. The Green Party is too. They pretty much instantly folded to malign influence, before they even really got started, and now they’re a tragic explicit spoiler candidate puppet that isn’t even making a convincing pretense of environmental progress as the goal. Even if your goal could succeed completely, and starving the Democrats could make them wither and get replaced by one-party Republican rule, and then something better arose in their place, without the generation-spanning catastrophe that would be that one-party Republican rule… whatever replaced them, would still be open to corruption.
There is a way to make progress. You have to fight for what you actually want. It’s not easy. But the strategy of simply refusing to engage with the power-brokerage system, because the people currently in charge of it are bad people, brings broad smiles to the faces of all those corrupt Democrats who are annoyed they had to pass a little bit of climate change legislation and corporate tax increases under Biden. They love hearing that you’re getting out of caring about politics. It means they can start to cater more to their core constituency. And they’ll be fine, whether the Democratic Party does an inch to benefit the working class or not, or even if it stays around or not.
It’s only the people in Washington who are trying to work for working people or the environment who will be hurt by your strategy.
“My babysitter has clearly been drinking. That’s not ideal. I think I’ll let this serial killer watch the kids for a while, instead.”
Fucking cowards.
Just take the swing, man. Yes, you’ll get in trouble. HE’S COMING AFTER YOU ANYWAY. Make him explain why he doesn’t have to show up for his bond hearing. Put him in jail for 24 hours for contempt of court.
They know you’re afraid to do it, and everyone who’s afraid to do it gives them a little more power. Give him a probation officer and tell him he has to report in person every 30 days. Fine him 5 million dollars. Sentence him to a week in the can before he takes office. He’s not a sitting president yet.
Fucking do SOMETHING. Or what, are you okay with 3 million Mexicans being in his crosshairs, but all of a sudden if it’s you, you’ve got places to be that day and can’t make it? Why?
If enough people were willing to stop tipping to end the practice by ruining the lives of waitstaff by cutting off their source of income there would be enough people to push for laws to pay a fair wage without needing to cause the problem in the first place.
It is the same logical leap that says if we just keep not voting for Democrats, they’ll suddenly get better.
I mean, something. That one gets the workers paid without them needing to enter into any kind of weird payment-is-voluntary servitude for it. It might also shame the owners into just abolishing the policy. Certainly it has a higher chance of success than just stiffing the workers and advising other shoppers to do the same.
“Does that mean you’re going to harass the owners to pay them a living wage, Leon? Maybe hand them some literature, mount some social pressure or a boycott? Change the laws? Give the owners a pile of ‘tip’ money from you, to give to the workers as proper wages? Something?”
“No. I like the owners. They sell me milkshakes.”
I don’t think they actually do. I think it’s a very vocal contingent, which has at least a little bit of overlap with the “Kamala Harris is literally Hitler” contingent. Also, I don’t participate enough in lemmy.world to be aware of what their normal moderation style is, but just based on this one instance it sounds like FlyingSquid unlike most LW mods is interested in taking some kind of action against the “Kamala Harris is literally Hitler” contingent.
Make of that what you will.