It's not fun interacting with them when they often want to engage in ad hominems. This is why I have no interest in the tankie triad.
this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2025
316 points (90.7% liked)
MeanwhileOnGrad
1938 readers
7 users here now
"Oh, this is calamity! Calamity! Oh no, he's on the floor!"
Welcome to MoG!
Meanwhile On Grad
Documenting hate speech, conspiracy theories, apologia/revisionism, and general tankie behaviour across the fediverse. Memes are welcome!
What is a Tankie?
Alternatively, a detailed blog post about Tankies.
(caution of biased source)
Basic Rules:
Sh.itjust.works Instance rules apply! If you are from other instances, please be mindful of the rules. — Basically, don't be a dick.
Hate-Speech — You should be familiar with this one already; practically all instances have the same rules on hate speech.
Apologia — (Using the Modern terminology for Apologia) No Defending, Denying, Justifying, Bolstering, or Differentiating authoritarian acts or endeavours, whether be a Pro-CCP viewpoint, Stalinism, Islamic Terrorism or any variation of Tankie Ideology.
Revisionism — No downplaying or denying atrocities past and present. Calling Tankies shills, foreign/federal agents, or bots also falls under this rule. Extremists exist. They are real. Do not call them shills or fake users as it handwaves their extremism.
Tankies can explain their views but may be criticised or attacked for them. Any slight infraction on the rules above will immediately earn a warning and possibly a ban.
Off-topic Discussion — Do not discuss unrelated topics to the point of derailing the thread. Stay focused on the direct content of the post as opposed to arguing.
You'll be warned if you're violating the instance and community rules. Continuing poor behaviour after being warned will result in a ban or removal of your comments. Bans typically only last 24 hours, but each subsequent infraction will double the amount. Depending on the content, the ban time may be increased. You may request an unban at any time.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Absolutely, you should not. People should be able to say what they want, if that somehow wasn't clear. What I was saying was that it's very silly to ban people for criticizing your decisions in clear and rational language[1], or for their politics, or for very tenuous claims of "ableism" if you just kind of don't like the content of what they have to say[2], or to call downvotes "abuse" and try to protect certain ones of your communities against getting downvotes by literally banning anyone who tries to give one to the content... but then, when the target is outside the kid-gloves safe space, turn loose this massive drama-cannon with wild insults and accusations and say "Yes! All good, our admins will join in in fact!" and then now hide behind this thing of "Oh ho that's just the wild west of the ol' internet for ya, free speech ya know" that you would never put up with if someone tried to, for example, give YOU a downvote or a dissenting comment[3], because that's abusive and they're a troll now.
This whole thing originated because you've been slinging around bans for people who don't get with the program you want them to get with or say things to you that you don't like. I didn't come to you whining to ask you to stop anyone being mean to me, I actually got involved because you wanted PugJesus to stop being mean to your comments and posts because he's not allowed. I'm much more in favor of people being able to have their say, I mostly object to the banhammering side, I'm just now poking at the hypocrisy of it.
Up to you though. You've clearly decided, I'm just repeating at this point, so cheers I guess.
Ok basically your argument devolves to misrepresenting and trivializing why we took any admin actions. I think you're being massively disingenuous and not worth it discussing with at this point, but I'll repeat, if our instance members think we're as hypocritical as you do, they're welcome to open the relevant governance posts and reign us in. It won't happen, cause we aren't of course.
Anyway I won't bother with this thread anymore. I have no patience for people who misrepresent the facts quite that much just to win internet arguments.
Up to you
You probably are not aware, but that user is known to be toxic. A lot of the mod action reasons are "be respectful" or "civility"
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/modlog?userId=18071443
-db0
Sounds like she "expressed some low opinions" of dbzer0, and it all of a sudden wasn't so absurd an argument path, and turned into a big deal.
I agree with db0 that this argument has pretty much been and done at this point, but yes this is just more "in-group vs out-group" stuff.
Edit: Also, there's a difference between expressing low opinions about someone and directly insulting them.
SoftestSapphic is trans. She was upset about a troll coming into her community and making fun of her identity in a particularly cruel way (likening it to fantasy creatures or a kids' game or something), and then further upset by the mods of blahaj defending the troll and banning people who criticized them. That's why she's angry about it. Honestly, I don't blame her, it makes perfect sense to me.
Ada said that she defended Dragonrider for quite a long time even after people started telling her they were encouraging people to self-harm and other objectively horrible behavior, because she felt bad because they were getting "harassed." Of course, when they did something much more minor to Ada, she suddenly felt they were toxic and had to go.
I don't want to have this whole ridiculous debate again. I feel stupid even touching on it to this extent, I just wanted to give you that relevant context. You're literally celebrating the dbzer0 admins for banning a trans person for trying to voice her objection to the performative and stupid way that trans issues are handled in some segments of Lemmy. In my world, she should be allowed to say that. In yours and dbzer0's, apparently she should not, because db0 is the arbiter of whether trans issues are being handled correctly, and she is not, and she needs to obey their instructions for what she can and can't speak up on.
Also, the "low opinions" db0 is talking about there were:
Do you think those are direct personal insults, which should be handled differently than for example criticism of an instance's policies or for someone's specific actions? Good! So do I. Because db0 apparently has some six inch thick rose-colored glasses that get applied to any action that is done by "our good people," though, they are just "low opinions."
Honestly I thought you were smart and well-meaning, just kind of focused on growth of the community and creating positive things. The more I am looking into how dbzer0 does things, the more I think lumping them in with the tankie instances with their admin behavior fits pretty well, and I have no idea why you're bending over backwards so far to defend them.
The majority of the users of Blahaj are trans too.
PJ himself admitted that being correct
https://lemmy.world/comment/18435763
On top of that, the community is called !yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com, having this kind of statements regarding the reported power tripping mod is as old as the community.
When you look at the recent thread about JordanLund (https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/48096338), you see things like
You commented below it without seeing any issue.
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/48096338/19830549
What has changed since then?
As I mentioned in a previous comment you never replied to (https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/49728632/20305246)
You are scrutinizing all dbzer0 mod actions to put them in the worst way possible, while nothing is new:
If !yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com seems too oriented for you, feel free to reanimate !modabuse@lemmy.sdf.org or create another community. That would be interesting, to be honest.
Thanks for bringing some documents to this fight. :)
Ok, that makes more sense.
It's up to you. I think it would be good to have another !yptb community that's not satire or a one person creation.
You could potentially enforce more respectful discussions there.
I actually lean more towards the side of "let the people talk." Some direct personal insults I feel like are maybe worth keeping away (I read this comment and was going to voice my agreement but then when I got to the "moron" part that instantly made me conclude, welp buddy, that's not productive). Mostly though I think the main asset of an alternative mod feedback community is that the dbzer0 admins are fine doing deletions and bans from YPTB for various reasons including "trying to stir up instance drama over our genAI policies, which are not up for debate." UP-FOR-DEBATING THE POLICIES IS LITERALLY THE PURPOSE OF THE COMMUNITY. But, as soon as someone comes into it and disagrees with the dbzer0 admins on some issue, they often decide it is some particular category of not allowed debate, and ban the person.
There are some other examples on that page that to me are equally stupid, but that one takes the cake to me. If I were to make a competing YPTB community, I think that's the most important rule I would change, personal attacks being allowed or not is a lot less crucial than that to me.
This is a direct consequence of having that community part of dbzer0.
A community is still subject to the rules of the instance hosting it.
A potential alternative would be to have the alternative community on an instance with a very few rules, but there's none that I know of at the moment.
Israel, drag, AI, every topic would still come up in the comments of a new community, and the mods of that new community would probably have to take a stance on those, or just see endless slapfights in the comments
An instance whose rules include "the rules are not up for debate" has no business hosting a community for critique of moderation. I would actually expand that to say that it's pretty silly to have that rule in the first place, regardless of what communities you're hosting, but it does seem to be a pretty popular viewpoint here for some reason. I'm legitimately surprised to hear it from an instance that's described as anarchist. The .ml instances are at least more open with their political alignments and then consistent with them in their moderation in practice.
Scratch an anarchist and an authoritarian bleeds, I guess, lol
I understand why an instance staff wouldn't want to have posts questioning instance guidelines every week.
Interestingly enough, in the case of anti AI bans, that topic was discussed on https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/49185248?scrollToComments=true , and it seems like both the mod and the person iniating the request found a way
So no, it's not really "Scratch an anarchist and an authoritarian bleeds"
Phillip hates that db0 isn't a carbon copy of his failed instance, therefore we're somehow not anarchists for not tolerating the intolerant.
We're just not going to see eye to eye on this stuff lol
Probably x)
Edit: just because you care about trans people
Literally this entire instance. Don't get me wrong there are worse places out there but its basically Lord of the Flies up in this place. I am very sure nobody in charge is over the age of 21.
I am actually not like you and I left this instance months ago because I wanted more moderation but it's clear these "anarchists" are ok with harassment and sexism as long as it is targeted towards who they perceive to be enemies. They have zero consistency in applying their "rules" and they hide behind "anarchism" to justify the same childish behavior they criticize other instances of doing.
Still no receipts, huh? Odd how you logged on for the first time in months to back up Phillip lying. Not suspicious at all.
Using others' lack of being terminally online isn't much of a gotcha.
They also didn't upvote Philip's other comments
I think you're being a bit too paranoid
Where's the receipts?
Goat called me paranoid about this person logging on for the first time in months to back up Phillip.
lol
Maybe after they come back on for the first time after 10 months they'll have them, because clearly they don't have them now.
Yeah. 100%. Well... there are plenty of 18-year-olds running around the world whose chronological age is a lot older. But yes. It actually mostly doesn't read to me as malicious from this instance, it just feels like people who have never experienced being in a collaborative circumstance where they have to get along with people who they don't see eye to eye with or have real friction with and they have to cope with it. Or they have never been in some kind of environment where one person is "in charge" but also has to earn respect of people. Like their whole concept is "I've got the mod buttons, you do not, so shut the fuck up, this is what's what" and they've never experienced the aftermath when you do that to people who have ability to push back in turn.
I mean at the end of the day it's just a stupid web site, but yes in my opinion being able to have these communication tools and have them function well is important. Maybe I'm the weird one. I do think it matters.
Also absolutely. 100%. Them laughing at SoftestSapphic when she's trying to give some pretty pointed feedback on treatment of trans issues, and then banning her for being "pissy" / "shitty" because of it, really rubbed me the wrong way. I didn't like that at all. And then yes the hypocrisy of doing that while flopping around like a soccer player moaning about "abuse" because people gave downvotes to some of their precious content, is just extra icing on the bratty-adolescent cake.
I stand by my mod actions on SoftestSapphic. Folks can make their own assessment without having to suffer through your opinion.
"And also, what the hell do you expect of dbzer0 admins to do about people expressing such opinions? You want us to go around protecting the people you like from public opinion?"
-db0
(Emphasis mine)
(IDK why I'm continuing at this point, I'll probably stop after this in case you want the last word. Both sides of the argument have had plenty of airing, and yes I think the modlogs 100% speak for themselves)
It all goes down to the drag issue in the end.
Either you think neopronouns are a right (Blahaj, dbzer0) and cannot be removed under any pretext.
Either you think neopronouns can be considered trolling under certain circumstances (LW apparently?)
By the way, you said in a previous comment (https://quokk.au/comment/661634)
Drag got banned when drag encouraged people to self harm. The neopronoun thing was a separate matter (see above)
Exactly this. Xenopronouns are just as valid as any other pronoun. PJ and Philip seem to be mostly ok with "traditional" (lol) trans pronouns like "xir/xe" or "they/them" so they think they are good trans allies. But they are only allies to certain types of "mainstream" trans folks. Because everything has to be mainstream before a Democrat will ever consider supporting it, in my experience. The moment the pronouns get "too weird" they all start freaking out. Xenopronouns? Forget about it! I've even seen it argued that xenopronouns are anti-trans (somehow)? Who knows, but it seems there's a bunch of LW folks who seem to be that its fine to hate on folks who use them.
"But I don't hate trans people, I just hate trans people who use the words I find gross" - transphobia.world
NOW YOU'VE DONE IT
Kidding.
On the substance, I'm just going to refer you to my previous answer, in which I pointed out that me reiterating how precisely I don't agree with what you just said will accomplish nothing at all (and, apparently, it did not.)
The only thing I will add is that the troll was not banned when they encouraged people to self harm. Ada actively refused to ban them for that, and then later, when they shared personal correspondence of Ada's without permission, that was a sin sufficient to justify a ban.
Citation: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/23453948/13537569, search for "sharing of private messages".
I cannot believe you are continuing to succeed in getting me to argue about this topic.
I edited the pronoun.
Thanks for the citation.
Even if Ada made a mistake (not banning drag soon enough), the conclusion is still the same: the decision of dbzer0 to keep that stance (neopronouns aren't debatable) is theirs, and if you willingly start to attack that stance, you're going to get actioned upon.
On top of that SoftestSaphic seems to be incorrect
https://sopuli.xyz/post/30807847/17981886
Dude I am blocking you. Continuing to pretend that neopronouns are the issue, and a perfect shield for anything dbzer0 wants to do, when they never were and it was instead things like trolling the whole concept of transgenderism and encouraging other users to suicide that was the issue, when no one copping these bans was refusing to use anyone's pronoun neo- or otherwise at any point that I'm aware of, is just pissing me off, and I already addressed it not just once but several times, directly to you, and brought your awareness to the fact that you didn't seem to be picking up on it.
I'm taking your advice. Talk to someone else. Honestly, it's rare that I get actually irritated when talking to someone on the internet, so congratulations. Go back and reread my earlier messages, if you start to feel that you need to hear any more of my opinion on this.
me too, please
Did you do something? The name is familiar but I don't remember specifics... whatever, I guess get in a long pointless argument with me and I'm sure it'll come to me.
I just want to be blocked
I was wondering the same thing tbh. Ciao.
And you making that comment using that tone is contributing to the flamewar
But why would Phillip be flaming when he lies about us?