I started out aiming to talk about the issue without reference to any past drama, but then someone specifically asked, “censorship from the mods, are you directly experiencing it? If yes, on which instance?” and specifically as related to anarchist points of view. Before today, I’d pretty much forgotten about the whole thing, but it’s a pretty valid and interesting question and so I sent some of the citations about when it happened to me.

I can feel through the screen how much you would like to be able to just order me not to be able to discuss this anymore, since my view is officially “incorrect” according to you. Fortunately, that’s not how it works.

That “explained in detail” is your interpretation. In most non-authoritarian communities, nobody has a monopoly on providing the blessed correct interpretation of what happened. I wasn’t even speaking to why I was moderated or the interpretations on the part of the slrpnk people that led to it, just what happened. You can provide your interpretation of the events and the reasons why I was temp banned, sure.

https://slrpnk.net/post/14823401

In my opinion, the broader context is that if someone wants to say their opinion, it’s okay if they disagree with someone. It’s not an “attack” and people don’t need to be “defended” against seeing enemy points of view, as long as they’re reasonable. You seem to have a different context you like to frame things in, where a post with 10 comments needs to be locked and half the comments removed if they are expressing an incorrect point of view. Like I keep saying, I think you are expressing anarchist trappings while violating anarchist principles in how you run your instance, and also creating a bad reputation for your instance, when you do that. You do you, though.

It is interesting to me that the people who are PASSIONATELY concerned about the plight of poor people in the third world, spend so much time pushing the solution of not voting for Kamala Harris, and so little time pushing support for charity work, NGOs in the United States, supporting the rare tiny handful of politicians who actually do care about human rights, or similar things. I think the amount of content I saw from them before the election that was dealing exclusively with the importance of not supporting Democrats probably outnumbered the other stuff by about 10:1. I guess as long as we make enough Kamala Harris memes, the Palestinians will be saved. Who knew?

Well, it worked out in the last election, I can’t wait for everything to get better for everyone in Gaza. That’s definitely what’s going to happen now, right?

All I’ve done is link to the comments section illustrating what I was saying had happened, had happened.

Here he is, arguing with people while removing their comments and leaving his comments in place: https://slrpnk.net/post/14823401/11894346

I have no idea why you’re defending this guy. Like I said, the communities that try to “protect” their points of view, saying that one viewpoint is permitted in their space but other ones are will get you banned, generally become laughingstocks over time. It’s very different from protecting against abuse or racism, when you “protect” your space against people who don’t agree with some particular detail the way some particular person has interpreted it, and appoint an arbiter of what are the allowed interpretations, to ban anyone they disagree with. I think you should abandon that practice, and the censorship of ideas you disagree with, if you want to say that you’re supporting an instance that respects individual human freedom.

I don’t really have a problem with you in general, I was a little bit surprised that you came out swinging to defend this moderator. Maybe this all sounds like sour grapes on my part, but that is usually the result of banning people for disagreeing with you. It sparks a surprising amount of resentment.

Yeah. I think they’re pretty good at exploiting tribal thinking, such that “he’s an anarchist just like us” or “he’s a vegan just like us” leads people to rally around someone, and overlook weird things that they’re doing.

The slrpnk admins, as far as I can tell, stand in the same relationship to anarchism that your average megachurch organization does with Christianity.

If all you look at is the words, it looks like they’re supporting it.

It’s hard for me to tell if I’m just set in my ways according to the way I used to do it, but I feel exactly the same.

I think Docker started as “we’re doing things at massive scale, and we need to have a way to spin up new installations automatically and reliably.” That was good.

It’s now become “if I automate the installation of my software, it doesn’t matter that the whole thing is a teetering mess of dependencies and scripted hacks, because it’ll all be hidden inside the container, and also people with no real understanding can just push the button and deploy it.”

I forced myself to learn how to use Docker for installing a few things, found it incredibly hard to do anything of consequence to the software inside the container, and for my use case it added extra complexity for no reason, and I mostly abandoned it.

db0 is real anarchists, as far as I can tell. Because they are not overbearing about it, it’s harder to be aware of them.

I think by definition, it’s easier to be aware of the “official” self-identified anarchist communities than the ones that are just doing their own thing.

That’s an interesting theory… I think there are some selected mods who are exactly that, but I don’t think that’s exclusive to slrpnk. One of my little conspiracy theories is that those bad actors got really good on Reddit at how to “take over” a subreddit so they can start bending it to be the way they want it to be, and I think a couple of the slrpnk mods have wormed their way into the good graces of the admins there and then used the anarchism as cover for pushing authoritarian agendas. I guess it’s possible that the slrpnk mod community as a whole is bad-faith actors, but I don’t think so.

I got curious about that one slrpnk mod who I tangled with who was pushing Green Party propaganda and deleting my comments about it, and just checked to see what he’s been up to since the election. My guess was that he would have switched to pushing “hard anarchism,” violence, reasons to hate the right wing, guns, things like that to stoke division. Nope. It’s been total crickets.

Turns out his passion for anarchism was fueled by the election, and since it’s over, he hasn’t had as much of a reason to be passionate about it. He posted 5 articles a few days ago, and right after the election he got in some kind of argument about the election which wound up getting a bunch of his comments removed, but other than that, no anarchism or participation of any kind. Weird how that works.

Yeah, those mods are bad, and they definitely exist including unapologetically on the tankie instances. I was just saying that the mirror-image bad mod, who will delete anything anti-Israel, is almost entirely a self-serving myth by a selected group that likes to pretend.

“We’re anarchists.”

“Cool. Here’s an urgent problem I see for the world that I think we should work on.”

“SHIT COCK GET OUT DISALLOWED We don’t say that here. You’re receiving a gentle ban, to think about what you’ve done. Be better.”

Haha yes, that’s usually the issue. I talked down below about getting banned on slrpnk because of some things I was saying. The comment thread with all the highly-upvoted replies getting removed by the mod, and the downvoted stuff intact, is hilarious to me:

https://slrpnk.net/post/14823401/11895951

The same mod also had a habit of arguing with people, while removing their comments but leaving his own side of the argument intact. He’s still a moderator there. In my opinion slrpnk needs to spend less time talking about anarchism and more time embodying anarchism.

I was banned on slrpnk because I said that Trump coming to power would be a dangerous thing for the world, people in Gaza included, and asked some questions about the point of view that was being expressed.

https://slrpnk.net/post/14823401

https://ponder.cat/modlog/2765?page=1&actionType=All&userId=201449

To me, the issue isn’t that we need to make a safe space for MAGA. Those people tend to be so obnoxious that there doesn’t even need to be a special rule for them to keep them out. The issue is that a lot of moderators seem to be nominating themselves the bosses of which are the permitted ideologies for people to talk about. Slrpnk does this, lemmy.ml does this. A lot of the niche “leftist” communities do it to anyone who’s a mainstream liberal.

Some of the big lemmy.world communities also do their own brand of bad moderation, but it’s usually not ideological, it’s just stupid.

Downvotes can’t actually hurt you.

Personally, I’m fine with saying unpopular things and getting downvoted for it. Mods removing a disallowed viewpoint is something different.

The type of anarchism that says, “You must agree with my anarchism, and if you have some incorrect view, I’ll use my powers to remove you from the space” is not actually anarchism. It’s actually strikingly reminiscent of how the Russian implementation of communism had nothing to do with worker-led socialism that it was branded as. They implemented freedom by declaring themselves the arbiters of what were the allowed types of freedom and ruthlessly repressing anything else, which isn’t how it works.

In general, I think it’s a myth that if you disagree with liberal orthodoxy on lemmy.world, you’ll be banned. Plenty of people on lemmy.world constantly criticize the liberal orthodoxy and it’s fine. The people purporting the myth are either:

1. Being flaming cocks and then claiming they were banned for their factual beliefs when they get banned, when that wasn’t the issue
2. Or else trying to make themselves feel better about the censorship of liberals that happens on their own instances, by claiming lemmy.world is doing the same to their “side” when they aren’t.

The occasional whining about how unfair it is that you can’t post anti-Israel stories on lemmy.world, for example, is nothing to do with reality, but is instead a disguised yearning for a space where you can’t post pro-Israel stories, and the mods will enforce that political viewpoint using their powers so the speaker can feel comfortable because all they see is things that they already agree with.

True that. Illegal immigration isn’t even a felony, it’s a misdemeanor.

When someone says that we need to start taking people’s children away forever, or send them into the desert without water to die, because they’re illegal immigrants, they’re revealing what they want to be able to do to people, for their own reasons. Enforcing the law simply has nothing to do with it.

I’m aware. I’m saying it’s simply a label for the person who brought it into the conversation in the screenshot, from literally nowhere for literally no reason.

It’s not guaranteed they won’t pay the peon. There’s just a process.

It seems like a weird process because everything in the legal world is framed in terms of adversaries, people trying to game the system, official processes that have to be followed, and delays. And for all I know, it will lead to whoever ratted him out getting the shaft. But there’s a big difference between “It’s more complicated than bebopping on down to your FBI office and getting handed a check” and “They’re definitely going to shaft him.”

It has nothing to do with “transphobia.” It’s just a way to slap a label on someone you disagree with, out of nowhere, to engage a tribal and reality-free way of thinking where they can be the good guy and you can be the bad guy.

The rules are complicated, as they stipulate tipsters in with a chance of the FBI portion of the reward cannot nominate themselves.

What?