this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2025
171 points (93.8% liked)
Ye Power Trippin' Bastards
1326 readers
9 users here now
This is a community in the spirit of "Am I The Asshole" where people can post their own bans from lemmy or reddit or whatever and get some feedback from others whether the ban was justified or not.
Sometimes one just wants to be able to challenge the arguments some mod made and this could be the place for that.
Posting Guidelines
All posts should follow this basic structure:
- Which mods/admins were being Power Tripping Bastards?
- What sanction did they impose (e.g. community ban, instance ban, removed comment)?
- Provide a screenshot of the relevant modlog entry (don’t de-obfuscate mod names).
- Provide a screenshot and explanation of the cause of the sanction (e.g. the post/comment that was removed, or got you banned).
- Explain why you think its unfair and how you would like the situation to be remedied.
Rules
- Post only about bans or other sanctions that you have received from a mod or admin.
- Don’t use private communications to prove your point. We can’t verify them and they can be faked easily.
- Don’t deobfuscate mod names from the modlog with admin powers.
- Don’t harass mods or brigade comms. Don’t word your posts in a way that would trigger such harassment and brigades.
- Do not downvote posts if you think they deserved it. Use the comment votes (see below) for that.
- You can post about power trippin’ in any social media, not just lemmy. Feel free to post about reddit or a forum etc.
- If you are the accused PTB, while you are welcome to respond, please do so within the relevant post.
Expect to receive feedback about your posts, they might even be negative.
Make sure you follow this instance's code of conduct. In other words we won't allow bellyaching about being sanctioned for hate speech or bigotry.
YTPB matrix channel: For real-time discussions about bastards or to appeal mod actions in YPTB itself.
Some acronyms you might see.
- PTB - Power-Tripping Bastard: The commenter agrees with you this was a PTB mod.
- YDI - You Deserved It: The commenter thinks you deserved that mod action.
- YDM new - You Deserved More: The commenter thinks you got off too lightly.
- BPR - Bait-Provoked Reaction: That mod probably overreacted in charged situation, or due to being baited.
- CLM - Clueless Mod: The mod probably just doesn't understand how their software works.
Relevant comms
founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Dude, Jefferson literally advocated for violence. They're not wrong in the slightest with that.
He said people dying in a violent battle (in pursuit of something) is the "natural manure". And killing lots of people is pretty much peak violence.
Got it, so we're allowed to post news articles on .world discussing facsists advocating for and directly enacting brutal violence... at a grand scale...
But unspecified, indirect references to the concept of violent resistance, self-defense, on a similar scale... nah, users can't do that.
You do not see a hypocrisy here?
A blatant and glaring double standard?
I'm just stating what fact is here. This was an easy question. I certainly hope people report the other calls for violence you mentioned as well. They definitely should.
But this isn't even the interesting question. I think your question with the double standard is far more interesting. Or whether Jefferson was right. Or if OP could quote him if they were using apostrophes or a bit more clever wording.
... What?
I can post a news link to an article that is reporting on fascists violently absuing people.
That doesn't get reported, or banned.
I cannot, for instance, say in a comment:
'someone should kidnap and '''deport''' these ice agents'
or
'someone should tie them into to a wheelchair and throw them into a jail cell'
... Those are much more direct and specifc calls for violence than uh, quoting an American founding father talking about generalized forceful resistance of tyranny... and even those comments got deleted.
It is blatantly obvious biased censorship:
Discussions of the State commiting literally illegal, unjust violence?
Totally allowed.
Discussions of justly resisting said unjust violence, with the force required to be actually effective?
Forbidden. Cannot even allude to it.
This is not complicated or even interesting.
This is an obviously blatant double standard, like ... I can walk up to you and punch you in the face, and if you take a swing back at me, actually, you doing that is assault and now you go to jail.
Maybe this is lost on non Americans:
The fascist goons currently running around being violent thugs are routinely breaking all kinds of fucking pre existing laws, all the way up and down their chain of command.
Literally thousands, tens of thousands of times a day.
I know. I mean you're pretty spot on with your first assessment. Reporting on violence is okay, calling for violence isn't. There is a difference between the two. The first is allowed per the rules, the second is forbidden.
And yes, this is some form of censorship. It's outlawed in most jurisdictions, including from the First Amendment in the US. I believe they call that "Imminent lawless action". And there's a bit more to it.
But hey. Again, I'm just stating how it is. If you want to argue with me on a personal level about violence... I also think self-defense is okay. I'm kind of opposed to violence, but it might be necessary in some cases. I just don't understand why you'd like to use a Jefferson quote, when the MAGA people tainted it by printing it on their t-shirts. If I were opposed to the fascists, I'd pick a quote that isn't used by them as well.
This is correct. It was discussed and clarified shortly after Luigi.
There's also the part where discussing all one's plans for violence publicly and loudly is kind of dumb.
Ok, lets say theres a news story about people calling for violent resistance against fascists.
Can that be posted?
Can commenters make their own statements of support for this, in that thread?
This is basic logic, these rules do not make any damned sense, they are obviously contradictory when applied in the manner you are suggesting.
Also uh no, no .world does not actually have any specific rule that deliniates the distinction you've invented about violence being ok in news posts but not in comments.
Find me those rules.
Also... if? IF you were opposed to fascists?
Implying this is a stance that requires deliberation and contemplation?
Pretend you're a brown skinned American citizen who just got fucking illegally kidnapped on fabricated charges and deported to a foreign death prison complex for the rest of your life, which will probably be quite short.
This has already fucking happened.
Does this remind you of any historical events...
... Hendrik, from an obviously German lemmy instance?
Anything involving gas chambers, ovens, work camps?
Anything ringing a fucking bell?
Dude, calm down a bit, we're not enemies. I'm on your side, we just talk a bit differently and probably live far away from each other. I'd send you a big stick or even help you cudgel the fascists if I were in the States. And yes, as a German I know how nazis look like and I can recognize them easily.
Here are the rules: https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/#1-attacks-on-people-or-groups
It's the first one: "[...] We do not tolerate serious threats or calls for violence."
Concerning your first question:
I think yes.
I think you're trying to shoehorn something in here. It's complicated. Is this "support" a call to do something? Is it intended to motivate people to join in as well and it includes violence? Then no. They cannot do that. Otherwise yes (unless it contradicts another rule.)
Btw, here's ~~your~~ MAGA shirt. I wouldn't wear it: https://www.amazon.com/Tree-Liberty-Thomas-Jefferson-T-Shirt/dp/B094H1VR7Z
Cool.
So anyway:
You're not proficient enough in English to understand what I'm saying.
You've suggested I buy a fascist shirt, while at the same time saying you would help me hit American fascists with a cudgel, when they all have body armor, military assault rifles, and armored personnel carriers.
... Despite the fact that I was not even the person who said the tree of liberty quote at all, but you keep acting like I did.
You've repeatedly insulted me multiple times by way of your poor grasp of English, I am bailing out of this conversation before I am as rude to you as you have been to me.
Sure, I did not intend to insult you. The t-shirt was a reference to my earlier comment where I intended to say: The quote which started the discussion isn't even anti fascist, but sadly also in use by the fascists. That was to contextualize what we're talking about, and only loosely connected to your statements.
You really can't expect me to answer to like 5 different questions and not make one omission. I expected you to know the difference between "call for" and "report on". But I respect your wish to bail out. I wish you the best. Sincerely. And my solidarity is with you. I wish there was more I could do. A free America is important to all of us.
The libs are libbing again