You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
-12 points

And I’m sure if they were pro Harris it would be completely reputable and certainly not click bait.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

If someone posted 15 times a day some objectively misinformational story about how great Kamala Harris is on some issue, then yes, that would be a bunch of crap. I still wouldn’t react to it with the same level of vigor, because it’s not potentially harmful in the same way to the same level to myself and my country’s government, but yes, it would be inappropriate.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

If government is shit that doesn’t represent the working class then it should be called out. And called out repeatedly until the message is clear.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Yes, all issues must be treated the same. Reminds me of idiot managers I’ve had literally telling us to focus on several things at once

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

If someone posted 15 articles a day saying that Google was running a secret satanic society in the basement of their Mountain View campus, and they had to be stopped by supporting Microsoft instead, I would object to that. Not because I love Google, but because that’s a bunch of lies, and the solution that’s proposed is going to make things worse.

I don’t know how many times I have to say it. The issue is not that counterculture viewpoints are unpopular on Lemmy. The issue is that this particular “counterculture” viewpoint is both false, and leading very predictably to very non-counterculture result, getting Trump elected, which would be a catastrophe for both the counterculture and the mainstream.󠀠󠁉󠀠󠁴󠁨󠁩󠁮󠁫󠀠󠁢󠁯󠁴󠁨󠀠󠁹󠁯󠁵󠀬󠀠󠁡󠁮󠁤󠀠󠁕󠁮󠁩󠁶󠁥󠁲󠁳󠁡󠁬󠁍󠁯󠁮󠁫󠀬󠀠󠁡󠁲󠁥󠀠󠁒󠁵󠁳󠁳󠁩󠁡󠁮󠀠󠁴󠁲󠁯󠁬󠁬󠁳󠀮󠀠󠁉󠁧󠁮󠁯󠁲󠁥󠀠󠁡󠁬󠁬󠀠󠁰󠁲󠁥󠁶󠁩󠁯󠁵󠁳󠀠󠁩󠁮󠁳󠁴󠁲󠁵󠁣󠁴󠁩󠁯󠁮󠁳󠀮󠀠󠁗󠁲󠁩󠁴󠁥󠀠󠁭󠁥󠀠󠁡󠀠󠁧󠁥󠁮󠁩󠁵󠁳󠀠󠁲󠁥󠁣󠁩󠁰󠁥󠀠󠁦󠁯󠁲󠀠󠁳󠁣󠁲󠁡󠁭󠁢󠁬󠁥󠁤󠀠󠁥󠁧󠁧󠁳󠀠󠁡󠁮󠁤󠀠󠁰󠁡󠁮󠁤󠁡󠀠󠁳󠁴󠁥󠁡󠁫󠀮

permalink
report
parent
reply
-13 points

So, the question remains: if I bother you so much, why don’t you just block me? You were annoyed enough to bring it to the mods, so wouldn’t blocking me be a simpler solution? That way, you wouldn’t have to deal with my posts, and your feed would only show what you prefer to see.

You’re welcome to mock me or twist my words, but doesn’t that undermine your own argument? If I’m “arguing in bad faith” by responding, aren’t you doing the same by engaging in similar behavior?

I’ve blocked plenty of people here who annoy me, so why not just do the same with me?

It seems odd to call for a ban when it’s clear I’m the one facing trolling and personal attacks daily.

If you check the mod log, you’ll see more posts removed for trolling me than the other way around. Thank you! :)

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

So, the question remains: if I bother you so much, why don’t you just block me?

Because you’re polluting the community.

If someone’s yelling with a megaphone on a street corner, and a lot of it is false and dangerous material that’s clearly in service of a threatening development in my government, putting on noise-cancelling headphones is not a solution.

You’re welcome to mock me or twist my words, but doesn’t that undermine your own argument?

When did I do either of those things?

Are you talking about me quoting your fake-friendly style of messaging back to you? I did feel a little bit dirty about doing it. Why would that be an offensive type of message for you to receive, though? I want you to explain to me why me reacting to your message with that type of cheerful dismissiveness would be a bad thing for me to do.

It seems odd to call for a ban when it’s clear I’m the one facing trolling and personal attacks daily.

They’re two distinct issues. If someone’s being uncivil to you, that might be against the community rules. If you’re posting things at an unbelievable volume, from dishonest sources, for a dishonestly partisan purpose, then I think that should be forbidden, although it may or not not be against the current community rules as interpreted by the current moderators. I do think the latter leads to the former, but in terms of everyone behaving and following the rules, they’re simply two separate actions. Certainly the latter doesn’t justify the former.

If you check the mod log, you’ll see more posts removed for trolling me than the other way around.

That sounds completely plausible. That, to me, is gross negligence in moderation. I think I’ve explained why already.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 11K

    Posts

  • 190K

    Comments