this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2025
82 points (94.6% liked)

FediLore + Fedidrama

3124 readers
172 users here now

Rules

  1. Any drama must be posted as an observer, you cannot post drama that you are involved with.
  2. When posting screenshots of drama, you must obscure the identity of all the participants.
  3. The poster must have a credible post and comment history before submitting a piece of history. This is to avoid sock-puppetry and witch hunts.

The usual instance-wide rules also apply.

Chronicle the life and tale of the fediverse (+ matrix)

Largely a sublemmy about capturing drama, from fediverse spanning drama to just lemmy drama.

Includes lore like how a instance got it's name, how an instance got defederated, how an admin got doxxed, fedihistory etc

(New) This sub's intentions is to an archive/newspaper, as in preferably don't get into fights with each other or the ppl featured in the drama

Tags: fediverse news, lemmy news, lemmyverse

Partners:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
sexy_peach@feddit.org
82
Moderator banned from their own community for practicing harassment (europe.pub)
submitted 17 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) by MonsterBug@sh.itjust.works to c/fediverselore@lemmy.ca
58 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Its a shame because they're prominent voice on lemmy. Good on the admins for not tolerating this. I don't understand the point of targeting a person you don't like on the internet just because they said something that upset you and spamming their post with downvotes. If you don't like someone block their ass and be done with it. I agree with the perspective that its harassment (and an incredibly petty ineffective form of it at that)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 40 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (35 children)

Good on the admins for not tolerating this.

...

How many downvotes exactly are we talking about here?

Is it, like, two hundred? Or is it, like, ten?

Edit: Wait, what the fuck? I got bored and checked it more. How did dbzer0 pick literally the most helpful and drama-free of all possible Lemmy users to ban? As far as I can tell, literally the only thing the dude does is post about cool stuff and chat. I didn't even know he was active as a moderator in any real capacity.

checks profile to see if he actually did confess to mass-downvoting dozens of votes at some user or some other sin that, while objectively not "abusive," might have been at least arguably not ideal or something

One of the first things I found was:

The only reason it’s “Vote Blue no matter who” is because right now, in America’s FPTP system, the Dems are the only real alternative in most areas to the GOP. It’s a pithy saying, not a political essay. The lesson is not “LOYALTY TO COMRADE BIDEN”, but “Don’t throw your vote away on a symbolic action; preventing fascism is more important than virtue signaling to no one, especially since ballots are secret”

Ooooohhh.... oh. Oh.

Good fuckin' God man. dbzer0, we love you, quit trippin'. Just relax. Not everyone you don't like or agree with is "abusive."

[–] ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (4 children)

drama-free of all possible Lemmy users

That's... not how I would describe the user.

They're banned from blahaj lemmy for repeated and ongoing gatekeeping and they've got a mile long modlog...

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 6 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Over the freaking Drag troll issue. You'll forgive us if not everybody shares the same opinion of who's creating the drama in that particular case.

[–] irelephant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 53 minutes ago

They do try to gatekeep gender in other ways though.

[–] Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 9 hours ago (1 children)
[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

That seems unrelated to the Blahaj comment?

[–] Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

drama-free

That's not how I would describe the user

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 3 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah, I was mostly just referring to the bit about being banned from Blahaj. Shoulda made that clear

[–] Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Even on that, he was involved in the 196 forced migration attempt

https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/35965565?scrollToComments=true

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 3 points 9 hours ago

Ah. I block most of the meme comms, so that pretty much passed me by entirely.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 17 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

Specifically, he said (among other similar things):

There's an argument to be made for neopronouns in the following cases: - People who don't like 'They' as singular - People who believe there should be a neopronoun(s) that is not simply neutral/neuter, but explicitly for NB identities To the first, I will die on this grammatical hill, but I also acknowledge that it's a matter of taste. If you want to push for Xe/Xim or whichever as gender-neutral-singular, that's fine, and I'll respect your pronouns, but I really do think that 'they' is perfectly serviceable as-is and we should just expand usage of it. If the cultural zeitgeist goes against it, though, it's whatever, if Xe/Xim becomes the new norm, I'll swap to Xe/Xim. To the second, I understand the argument, but I find it non-intuitive. I'll respect the pronouns of people who want a dozen different new pronouns added to the lexicon, but I'll also vehemently argue against the practice. Pronouns are meant to streamline communication, and gendered language itself is something of a relict.

"Gatekeeping." Ban.

This whole thing is stupid. I don't even want to step into or bring up the other big relevant issue that caused strife because it's even stupider than that.

You guys are fuckin' with this guy because he did downvoting, and because he expressed what overall sounded to me like pretty reasonable opinions honestly.

People aren't hating on you here. It's fine. You don't have to turn everyone into an enemy.

[–] ada@piefed.blahaj.zone 6 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

And if it was a single comment, you'd have a point, but it was ongoing, repeated and deliberate arguments in a space that had explicit rules against what he was doing, rules that he understood. And rather than following the rules, or posting in other communities, he brought it up over and over again, arguing that he has the right to decide other people's identities.

And when banned for it, he made sure to keep adding flames to the fire.

Whatever else he is, he is not drama free.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Is blahaj drama free?

People have pointed out some times when he intersected with some drama that I wasn't aware of, so sure, fair enough. I guess my point is even when I look at those he definitely was not the source of the drama in the situation. He was banned from blahaj for literally just showing up and saying reasonable things. If that's against the rules of your instance, then sure, you can do that, but don't try to flip it around where the person showing up saying reasonable things is all of a sudden an asshole somehow.

Nothing in the comment I quoted is "adding flames to the fire." It's not "repeated and deliberate arguments." Nothing is transphobic, nothing is denying anyone else's identity. That's why I quoted some of the actual words, to make it clear how ultimately reasonable he was being however you want to spin it into some kind of hate crime. A lot of people feel like, if they think something reasonable, they're allowed to say it, and it's weird and controlling for some other person to say that opinion is the incorrect opinion and demand that they not say it within certain spaces.

I get that you're interpreting it as some kind of deliberate naughty disobedience, but you're not his boss, you're not his parent. The whole "moderator" / "ban" paradigm has brought in this nutty thinking where people who run an instance can be the boss of what opinions are allowed or not allowed on that instance. It's weird. In my opinion.

[–] scintilla@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

am I misunderstanding the definition of gatekeeping? It sounds like he doesn't like neo-pronouns because the complicate language and he sees them as pointless but will still use them?

Is from when blajah was bending over backwards to defend drag?

[–] ada@piefed.blahaj.zone 8 points 9 hours ago

Drag is banned from blahaj. Gatekeeping people's identities and pronouns is still against the rules.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 5 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

Gatekeeping is when you don't think what I want you to, so I have to remove you from my community because you didn't think what I wanted you to (edit: means YOU were gatekeeping, obviously, in case somehow it wasn't clear)

Abuse is when you downvote people I say you can't downvote

Ban is okay though, for someone I say it's okay for. That's not abuse like downvotes are. Obviously.

Get with the program

/s

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 10 points 13 hours ago

Ada's idea of gatekeeping includes using "you" as a pronoun.

The other reply here, from the name I will not type, is by an instance-hopping / ban-evading spam goblin who posts right-wing propaganda and pretends he's just a curious lil leftist who thinks it's neat-o.

This whole thing is an ESH that may extend to everyone commenting, including me.

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 11 points 14 hours ago

You shouldn’t judge a user by the length of their modlog.

load more comments (30 replies)