You Don't Fix Anything By Getting Rid of Democracy and Transparency

I didn't say you were tankies, I actually said you were not. I just said something weird was going on with dbzer0. Your comment here, I say without really meaning any hostility by it, is more weird stuff.

Every single one of the issues you've listed, you've reframed it into something different than it was. Neopronouns were never the issue, it was blahaj shielding a transphobic troll from criticism and banning people who complained about them (complained about them while using accepted pronouns, usually while explicitly saying 'yes I'm fine using people's pronouns'), purely because the troll cleverly decided to involve neopronouns into the issue. And then pretending that anyone who was on the "enemy" side was obviously a pronoun-hater and that was the entirety of the issue.

Intolerance towards genAI-hater trolls was never the issue, it was random mod actions against people who were not genAI-hater trolls. And then pretending that anyone who got the random unwarranted mod action was probably a genAI-hater troll.

Both of those are the dishonest framings that the people defending whatever weird decision love to use. And, no matter how often it's pointed out to them that some other people disagree with their framing, they simply ignore it, as if the person hadn't said anything at all, and repeat the framing that conveniently makes their answer the only possible answer. That is textbook tankie-instance behavior. It's part of what makes them insufferable to try to talk with. Even if your politics are clearly not tankie.

And, of course:

someone who went on a harassment campaign towards one of our users

Aha!

"One of our users."

That's the root of the issue, to me. You're starting to treat "your users" differently than other users.

One of your users spent part of yesterday following me around and replying to me in a few different threads demanding that I take part in an argument I'd already addressed and then told them I wasn't interested in continuing. Is that harassment? No, because it's your users.

There's this massive thread accusing PugJesus of all kinds of stuff: That he's pro-Israel, that he's a terminally online weirdo loser, that he never backs up anything he says, that he bans anyone who criticizes Israel, that he's transphobic and doesn't respect people's pronouns, that he's a twat, and so on. That's completely fine, because he's a "lib." He's the enemy. We can all yell at him, insult him, nothing needs to be justified, it's a big hateful groupthink that defines things in terms of enemies (and a crucial part is twisting things around so that someone can be defined as a horrifying enemy in some way, which is why they're pretending he is pro-Israel) and in-groups. Why is that all okay? Because he's not one of your users. He's the out-group, he is a liberal apparently.

In some forums, that kind of thing is disallowed. If you make personal attacks or insults, you get mod action. If you pretend someone said something they didn't say to stir up shit, you get mod action. Ada's description from a different domain was actually pretty good: There are certain types of respect that are not "a reward for good behaviour." They're just what we need to do for each other to keep the community on the rails. On most of Lemmy, the mod action for violating that kind of respect is overtly one-sided; if you're in the in-group, it's allowed, if you're aiming it towards the in-group, then you get mod action because it's a crisis.

Does that one-sided moderation, and officially badjacketing people as "Zionists" and genocide supporters and then going full-bore against them as a result, mean you're tankies? Not in the literal sense, no. But you're starting to act like the tankie instances, all of a sudden, when it seems to me like you used to be chill and sensible. You had your politics but you weren't dishonestly attacking and moderating against anyone who had some different kind of politics, and mobbing up against them like Lord of the Flies. Now it seems like you are, and it happened (from my POV at least) all of a sudden out of nowhere, and it's weird to me.

(Yes, I know what badjacketing means. I placed it in the sentence the way I did to make a point.)

I think Philip was referring to the venom and hostility on display from some lately. I said something similar to pug last night. To be clear it isn't you or anything you've done.

And I fully understand the recoiling at some of the hyper reflexive venom on display from a few when anything regarding AI is brought up. It's a tool, and neither good or bad on its own. But some squeal like drama queens if you even bring it up.

Conversely the other day I had someone from your instance call me, someone who would at least be a syndicist a shit-lib. Because I made a point of calling for solidarity and mutual aid, pointing out that our failures to do so are part of what has led us to the current points of crisis we find ourselves in. I had a bit of a chuckle at the tanky talk. But it wasn't something completely isolated. Though again I'm gonna reiterate. None of this involves you. And you aren't their keeper. They are adults who can make their own decisions and mistakes.

Not sure why you're saying it's coming out of nowhere when you are aware of that link.

I didn't say the issues were unrelated, I just said the stupidest Lemmy argument (among some stiff competition) was back and getting debated to death again for some fuckin' reason, along with some other stupid arguments. What the fuckin' reason was wasn't part of what I was trying to say.

People aren't following you around, they reply to comments you make about the whole situation

@eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com became very upset that an admin (he kept emphasizing that, like I need to treat someone different because they're an admin, IDK, bow and scrape? It was nothing related to admin duties, they were just weighing in in a massive whiny slapfight (on both sides)) had replied to my comment and I hadn't responded to them. One, two. I explained myself, they didn't like the explanation, and they started jumping into among other places a 4-day-old thread to try to continue the argument.

Like I said in that reply, I saw absolutely no point in getting in a new slapfight about it, told them so, and they really didn't like that explanation and tried to start the slapfight anyway in multiple threads (sort of accusing me of doing something wrong by not wanting to? IDK, it's weird, check it out.)

Anyway, that's weird, following me into random additional old threads to try to continue the argument I'd already explicitly told them I wasn't interested in is what I referred to as "following me around."

I pointed this out to you in the !fediverselore@lemmy.ca thread and you acknowledged it: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/49571446/20253309

Here's PJ's response as they're banned from dbzero atm: https://feddit.uk/post/33315963/18929221

That whole thing got debunked quite quickly https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/49344640/20291854

What did he accuse you of doing?

Edit: Wait. How did PugJesus ban your account?

Receipts for that?

No he didn't. They killed the guilty and the innocent making no effort to distinguish between them. The soldiers mostly escaped whereas civilians were murdered. In fact most people in Haiti had little stomach for the sort of purge of French women and children he desired to the point where it doesn't happen until he tours a particular settlement.

One can argue all day long he was revenging very legit harms but it doesn't make him less of a monster and his people ultimately agreed and murdered him.

Still waiting for Boost to support it (which is planned), then I'm jumping ship.

Tankie is a term used derogatory that essentially refers to people who are self proclaimed communists that support the CCP and other authoritarian governments that label themselves as communist. I'm decently sure the term is a reference to the Tiananmen Square.

The tankie triad is a reference to the 3 biggest instances for them: lemmy.ml, lemmygrad.ml, and hexbear.net

Now in all honesty I have only seen a handful of bad faith actors. Usually it's because:

1. They are extremely critical of the US and in extension Israel, which is completely valid because right now the US is a shithole
2. They are extremely defensive of any communist parties. They deny any wrongdoings of the CCP as western propaganda, take the side of Russia over Ukraine, CCP over Taiwan and HK, etc.

To me it's hypocritical to be against the current authoritarian and fascist US, but also be supportive of the authoritarian CCP and Russia. It's ok to recognize some actions that the CCP has done as an objectively good thing (like modernization of public transport), but they also deny the fact that the CCP has done atrocious acts and essentially bully the neighbors (aka the rest of Asia).

For reference I have no issues with the idea of socialism or even communism, but the CCP is far from those ideals.

Anyone left of Reagan is a tankie.