I had hoped that the corporate control over the web was to blame for this, but I’m not so sure anymore.

I can’t say with 100% certainty that it has or hasn’t, but I can tell you that at least in the BBS, IRC/AIM/ICQ, individual forum days, there were certainly crackpots, but we weren’t all mixed together on a common platform that insisted on giving them equal “airtime” or worse.

I think that your example could fall under the umbrella of hate speech, and thus removal would be entirely justifiable. Even if it doesn’t qualify as hate speech, moderators still have the discretion to remove it for a variety of other reasons.

From the post:

Moderators, if someone is responding to many root comments in every thread, that’s not “in a smaller proportion” and you’re free to do what you like about that. If their “counter” narrative posts are making up half of the posts to your community, you’re free to address that. If they’re belligerent or rude, of course you know what to do. If they’re just saying something you don’t like, respectfully, and they’re not spamming it, use your words instead of your moderation abilities.

From the way the post is worded, and it was announced officially, it sounds like as long as they’re being civil and not spamming, it’s fair game. I’ll be happy to be proven wrong, but nothing has yet been officially clarified.

Edit: LW has since edited/clarified that would be considered an attack on a group, but that just goes to show how poorly written and poorly thought out this policy is.

In general, I believe that the negative effects of overmoderation are more problematic for this platform than the negative effects of allowing idiots to get downvoted for saying dumb shit.

I’ve only seen a handful of communities that were truly over-moderated (read: badly moderated). If it’s just a handful, then maybe deal with them directly and/or let the Fediverse do its thing. Badly moderated communities (and instances) can, do, and will drive people away to alternatives.

Communities are created with rules and expectations for a reason: be it a goal, to maintain a vibe/safe space, or whatever it may be. Vote manipulation in Lemmy is also a thing that exists. I even posted about one campaign I dug up; those never went away, merely changed tactics. That is to say that depending on votes to set the record straight is an extremely flawed assumption when bad actors can manipulate it in such a way.

Ultimately, it’s up to the more intelligent people to determine what is true and false, and the best way to do that is through open, uncensored debate.

So people have to debunk flat-earthers theories everytime they show up? Seems unrealistic

If u think quoting a saying is a valid argument then that truly is mental illness

If you think quoting a saying and then elaborating on how it applies isn’t a valid argument, then you’re either arguing in bad faith, dangerously obtuse, or both. Judging by your continuing insistence on labeling anyone who disagrees with your view insane, I’m gonna guess it’s both.

Double think is one hell of a drug

You clearly don’t know what double think means if you think distinguishing between two superficially similar but substantially different things is an example of double think.

Thats a very interesting place to draw the line on free speach

Yeah, I tend to draw the line just before intentional and unnecessary harm. I’m kooky like that 🙄

Please explain where u draw the line on harmfull disinformation

I already did. Very clearly.

Also by the rules equality it doesnt matter if ur in a group of vulnerabile people in gonna treat u the same.

That’s some bigotry- and victimization- justifying horseshit. Treating everyone equally does not mean treating respectful debate and othering abuse as equally valid.

Words can be weapons and how and why they’re wielded matters just as much as with physical weapons.

Again by rule of equallity i dont give a fuck what group u are im gonna be equallity offensive to u.

That’s STILL not how equality works. You’re accidentally sorta right, though: your closed minded vitriol is loathsome and offensive to every decent person, not just the ones it victimizes.

And here u are arguing that ur not mentally ill

Nope. I’m arguing that not subscribing to your “free speech absolutism” nonsense is not proof of mental illness. Before diagnosing strangers for disagreeing with your warped perspective, maybe crack open a medical textbook or just a dictionary. Your definition of mental illness is histrionic and bigoted to say the least.

U know what the extremely metallh ill oftem claim?

Seriously. Look up what mental illness is. This willful ignorance shtick is not the principled stand you think it is. It’s idiocy typical of several different personality disorders (which I’m not armchair diagnosing you with and which isn’t the same thing as mental illness).

I though the irony if if u responded would be pretty funny.

You’re getting increasingly incoherent and once again showing ignorance of the actual meanings of words. Are you under the influence of any intoxicants or is this combination of belligerence and idiocy just how you always act?

Whats the poiny of telling someone to fuck off if u dont mean to harm my feelings

I DO mean to insult you and “harm your feelings”. You see, unlike the innocent people already being stigmatized and othered who you insist on antagonizing and condemning, you have actually CHOSEN to assign yourself the role of Devil’s Advocate to protect hate speech and thus deserve emotional harm that might make you less comfortable on your edgelord throne of bullshit.

Are u excercising ur right to offend me?

I am indeed. Bigots and their defenders aren’t a vulnerable and persecuted group.

Ohh the irony.

Seriously, just do a search for “irony definition”.

Also if u reapond to any of this please explain where u draw thw line on harmfull disinformation

Already did.

(i feel we can have an actually productive conversation about that).

Based on this and your initial comment, I highly doubt it, but I’ll give you one last reply to demonstrate that any of this is getting through to you. If your reply to this indicates that it hasn’t, I’ll consider you unreachable and stop wasting my time.

The sidebar says that people should understand what veganism is before commenting and that pushing carnism is a bannable offense. This is why we have the community [email protected] for these kinds of discussions.

This post you’re talking about is the majority dunking on the minority. Eating meat is not a neutral position between carnism and veganism.