-Hi! My name is UserChan, I'm 25 years old, a digital artist, and you can request commissions from me whenever you want, and for anything you want 🐺.
*I do self-shipping, anime or cartoon drawings, animals, fanart, nsfw, etc🐾.
Uh... Why me? I don't know what to say about that.
Fue un error pedir ayuda y justicia en este lugar, está hecho más para discusión que arreglo. Siempre gana la mayoría por más que hayan argumentos a mi favor. Bueno, es todo. Este caso estaba perdido desde antes de un veredicto, vaya pena. Yo digo la verdad sin jugar al victimismo, le arda a quién le arda, si es injusto, no me doblego por opinión de rebaño.
O sea, según tú, ellos pueden descartar mi arte, bajo una etiqueta que no es, porque ya expliqué no, una no dos, sino más de diez veces que no entra en lo furry, entiendo el baneo de un par de dibujos como el de Shinebone Alley al ser más confuso, pero el resto… Wow. Debo creer que esto fue “justo”. Increíble. Y sin poder apelar por capricho de los moderores. Bueno, estoy acostumbrada a lo injusto de las comunidades. Y aún así es decepcionante, tenía una mínima esperanza de recibir apoyo y un poco de justicia por algo que no hice.
I already explained how the log works; the modlog is only visible to the moderator. It has nothing to do with the public log, which anyone can see. The moderator already showed the modlog, but that doesn't excuse her from the fact that she continues to justify the ban, even if she didn't do it herself. She could remove it or tell the moderator responsible for the ban, and they don't want to.
But of course, I'm always the one defending myself, the bad guy and the "ignorant one."
Necesitan un villano en un cuento, y el sesgo muy cargado de "los gringos tienen razón y no aceptamos razones lógicas".
I already explained how the log works; the modlog is only visible to the moderator. It has nothing to do with the public log, which anyone can see. The moderator already showed the modlog, but that doesn't excuse her from the fact that she continues to justify the ban, even if she didn't do it herself. She could remove it or tell the moderator responsible for the ban, and they don't want to.
But of course, I'm always the one defending myself, the bad guy and the "ignorant one."
That's a "bureaucratic trap." Sending me to an office you know is locked and whose key you have in your pocket. It's an incredibly cynical move: someone offering a solution ("talk to them") knowing full well that the platform doesn't have a working direct messaging (DM) system, I'm not going to use external apps, and I can't post in a community where I'm banned.
It's the equivalent of telling me, "If you want me to put you in handcuffs, go talk to the guards on the other side of that locked door." You're literally the only one I could contact, and you ignored me, even though you could have told your "colleagues" that someone wants to communicate but can't because of the ban. You're the only one I contacted because you're in communities I can visit. The other moderators are sitting pretty with an unfair warning that I never violated, and it's their ignorance that caused this problem. "This is exhausting," of course it's exhausting, but you yourself keep dragging this out even though you still have the title of moderator. It's incredibly ironic that you and the moderators who have the power to end everything with two clicks, complain of being tired in front of the person who has had to research, debate with 40 people and defend their artistic identity against a wall of ignorance for days. Do you think I didn't get a headache a few days ago arguing with so many incompetent people who think they own a term they misuse and judge my work based on that ignorance? Everything could have been solved in two clicks, but no, they prefer to keep justifying their inability to listen to their users, instead of providing a real solution called listening without causing more problems.
The "Modlog" fallacy: You yourself admit that you use Photon to see the logs clearly. This confirms my point: Lemmy only shows what's public to the average user, not what you control. Even I understand that simple explanation and see the error, because Photon isn't for public use on the platform without being a moderator. Furthermore, you admit to having the power to unban someone the whole time, and you didn't use it. You probably didn't even mention that you got into trouble because of moderator X, and you didn't tell that moderator about the issue, even though they're active in the community, as I saw a moment ago. And since they're only active in the community where I was banned, I can't contact them through a comment; otherwise, I would.
Confirmation of timing: You just confirmed that the logs show the time of the action (the ban), not the creation of the post. This proves I was right all along: the ban happened weeks ago. My confusion, which I already mentioned in my other comment, stemmed from the mistake of continuing to show my drawings and then disappearing.
The gaslighting of the "misunderstanding"—that everything is a "language misunderstanding"—you continue to underestimate my knowledge, even the most basic and obvious, but you don't take into account the fact that I research what you tell me. The misunderstanding was seeing my drawings untouched less than a week ago; the lack of definition and prejudices you have in art are not a "misunderstanding." You impose it and don't appeal to complaints. It's a condescending way of saying, "It's not that I'm lazy, it's that you don't understand English and you got confused."
"If you're going to come back, you'll get banned; if you're not going to come back, why do you want the unban?"
The reality: It's about cleaning up something I didn't even do. The ban is an unfair stain based on a lack of understanding of an art concept that doesn't apply to mine. Demanding an unban means demanding they acknowledge that the sanction was a technical and artistic error. It's not just a whim; it's about the dignity of defending my art and myself.
She's practically admitting she has the power to lift the ban, but she doesn't want to. However, she keeps replying, justifying, and deflecting the issue with "it's not my responsibility, but I still have the ban removal button" instead of simply doing the right thing or stopping making excuses and being honest about how she just insists my art infringes on something when it doesn't.
It's an old trick to wash her hands of the matter.
Basically, this is the "not my problem, even though I still have the moderation button" handbook. You admit I'm right about the timing (three weeks, not months), but then you use circular logic to justify that "your art isn't welcome" based on a seven-month-old deletion that, again, stems from your personal opinion and not a technical definition. And as I said, I accept that if that time has passed and it was Lemmy's mistake to keep showing my drawings even though they were "deleted," I should be allowed to. Furthermore, you're blaming me for something I didn't know, because it's not like I received notifications warning me of a violation. The public log shows the creation date and the reason for deletion, but it doesn't provide any warning to someone new to the platform. I literally had to learn how the moderation log works because of accusations that "I'm a liar," and ironically, I ended up learning about the Modlog, something the average Lemmy user doesn't know and is left with only the public information, which is open to interpretation. Nor should they assume that users who aren't familiar with all the functions, such as viewing their own public log, know everything. What your response implies is this: You admit the timing error, which I appreciate. But there's a "It's not my community" fallacy: You say it's not your responsibility to lift the ban because "you no longer wanted to moderate," but you're still an active moderator enough to respond and review logs. It's a complete contradiction: if you have the power to view the Modlog and respond, you have the power to correct an injustice. By saying "you have to accept that some people consider your art furry," you're admitting that the rules of that community aren't based on facts, but on opinions. Ignoring the very history of art.
But if you don't want to lift the ban—because it's clear you won't, not because you lack the power, but simply because you don't want to—then you're not doing it. If you remove it, good for you. I assume you understood something about this whole circus (which wasn't the goal; it was to get you to lift an unfair ban). Anything logical will do. I'll decide in time whether to post there again or not; currently, I don't feel like it, even without the ban. For me, it's fine. With such poor moderation and prejudiced moderation based on opinions rather than facts, it's not worth being there. It's easier and more honest to admit that you clearly don't want to reinstate me because of one of your opinions, than to keep making excuses. I have no problem admitting a mistake, or saying, "I think your art is garbage, and that's why I won't lift the ban." Because I have no qualms about telling you that you're just avoiding and dragging this out. After all, you'll carry on as if nothing happened, and I'm the one who takes the flak from people who think I'm the problem, even though it rolls off my back once I see their attitudes, their racism, and their aversion to information. It's not for nothing that I prefer to respond with memes in Spanish, because it's impossible to reason with the majority in this thread anymore. I've already had my fill of headaches arguing with dirty, pseudo-expert walls. Now all I can do is read, knowing full well that this will all come to nothing, because you're too lazy (Except for washing your hands of the matter) or you don't want me there, and as I said, I only have one thing left to accept about this ridiculous problem: Not everyone is willing to reason. And I'll just move on with my life.
See? Only one moderator has access to the modlog, but nobody believed me, lol.
Anyway, that clarifies what I've been saying. There you can see the ban, which wasn't months ago. Although, if it's true that "there are errors in Lemmy" and my posts only disappeared a week ago, I can accept that explanation. That said, I didn't accuse you of anything other than the Digital Art ban (the queerphobia and homophobia came from other people, and I'm not even interested in the community where I contacted you; I just went there to contact you and then left). And I don't want to appeal it. I still insist that Lemmy's direct messaging (not the apps I don't want to download) isn't secure, and the message itself says so. I also don't know where to see a message if I receive one because there's no chat icon. I don't know if you think I'm new to social media because I'm not. I don't need a tutorial, but if the platform is missing something essential, it's obvious that anyone would take a shortcut like commenting on other sites. And because of how I had to resort to a "public statement" for someone to listen. Likewise, even if you don't want to be a moderator, which is understandable, while you still are one you should listen to your users when they tell you that a sanction was unfair, because I already clarified, my uploaded content there isn't furry, and the term isn't an opinion, it's a fact. As an artist, although you're not obligated to understand or accept every aspect of art, you also can't base a historical term (like what is and isn't furry) on a personal opinion. Avoiding listening to me was, from my perspective and experiences with people like that, simply washing your hands of an issue that could have easily been resolved with a couple of correct actions. Being responsible isn't about evading the issue, even if you don't want to be contacted through other means. It doesn't matter if they say (referring to both moderators and users of this thread) that I'm "the villain" (also because of the points system, they don't deny my point) because the record only confirms what I said, and I'm also aware of what I did and didn't do, just as I'm willing to accept if I made any mistakes, like blaming you (although only partially, as I said, you could appeal or try to talk even in the comments) or accepting that the fact that my posts disappeared a week after (not months ago) the ban, because platform errors happen (Lemmy is very unstable) and I'm not certain if that's what happened or not.
I doubt you'll even consider lifting my ban; otherwise, you would have done it from the start. But whether you lift it or not, it's clear your colleague (if it's not an automated bot, though you're also a moderator manually) doesn't seem to like my art, and I don't think I'm treated well there. It's up to you whether you lift it, and then I'll decide whether to stay or leave. This whole thing is ridiculous and could have ended with a simple discussion.
I read that comment before it disappeared, although I think he could have appealed the ban and she didn't. What a waste to post there. (And partly this post that went nowhere, just people bothering).
P.S: In Shinbone Alley, they're normal cats; they don't interact with humans like humans. Like Tom and Jerry. But in that case, I can somewhat justify the confusion.
People just want to hate. My stuff isn't even furry, and they treat it like I posted something inappropriate. I've stopped getting angry and just respond with mockery.
That's the date the post was created. The date of the manual ban isn't public and can only be viewed through Modlog. Considering you commented about three times without any response from me, I'll say this now: Si sí, ya te vi.
I know, when you explain once, it's fine, twice if you're generous, but if they ask for three explanations, it's because the other person is stupid.
You mean I invented terms from centuries ago...? Nambreh si soy una cosa bárbara y ni yo sabía.
They're trying to force things on me, lies, wow, what a lovely place Lemmy is! I appreciate those who offer me support, even those who are ambiguous. Unfortunately, there are many people who seem allergic to research and don't understand that my art went months without being banned. The moderation dates are from when the post was published, and I know this because, unlike some, I realized the ban happened a week ago, and before that, my drawings remained untouched because they always reappeared. It doesn't even matter anymore whether I believe it or not; the outcome isn't going to change, and I'll continue with this unfair ban. But at least I defended myself. That art community is a mess, and many of the comments only reinforce the idiocy of all this; they always turn a plea for help into a circus. Grow up! It's all a race to see who's right instead of reasoning. I've been on the internet long enough to know who's an idiot and who isn't. This will be my last comment on the subject because they are truly exhausting, and I can be sure that I told the truth.
Como decimos nosotros en estas situaciones: Cállense gringos.
Ye Power Trippin' Bastards @lemmy.dbzer0.com I was banned by the moderator of Digital Art for prejudice
Lemmy Support @lemmy.ml Can a moderator or someone help me?
Asklemmy @lemmy.ml Any chromatic scale composers for FnF?
Asklemmy @lemmy.ml Should I continue with my FNF project?
OpenSourceGames @lemmy.ml Fnf Mod: Night Of Yokais (Demo)
I understand your intention and I appreciate it, truly, but it doesn't help the problem because I've known for a while now (as shown in the Modlog screenshots) who's responsible for the ban. And of course, my point is that I can't contact them because they're only active in Digital Art (the community I was banned from). I can't comment on their posts, and I insist, Lemmy doesn't have secure direct messaging. Even if I wanted to contact you to chat, the only way would be to register on those external apps I mentioned, Element.io or Matrix, which I won't do. And if I did, I already know how they'd think of me, considering how they treated me.
If I wanted to talk to you, my message would get lost.