AceTKen

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 hours ago

Mods or Admin can. I can't.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 17 points 9 hours ago

Actually, I've been unbanned from 10 of those subs due to this post because it was found to be an unjust ban. Also, are you able to point at the part where I stated I was anti-image generation, or are you just being standard-issue internet hostile?

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 9 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

I was subscribed to one of the communities that I was banned from and was in there pretty regularly.

If I'm unbanned or not, that is ultimately up to the mods. I'm not really stumping for it one way or the other.

My main purpose here would be essentially to say that these kinds (multi-community, permanent, and over very light and expected interactions from normal people) of bans are not justified and perhaps mods should rethink the process and not assume the worst of everyone.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 5 points 15 hours ago

Oh, I'm aware, but they weren't as exposed as they are since 19.10 made them easily visible to Mods. It was MUCH harder to get downvote totals prior.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 8 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (4 children)

Non-biased explanation: in the initial image, you can see two "ban waves."

The 10 bans three months ago stem from a single downvote in one Community.

The other bans from two months ago are from four downvotes over a 10 month timeframe in one Community.

I have also stated in this thread that I don't have issues with AI-gen images, but there are shoddy ones and well-done ones.

EDIT: Added the info to the initial post along with some more explanation now that we've uncovered it. Should hopefully save me from having to go over it constantly.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 day ago

Just one more for the road since I think the thread is dying down and I don't like leaving things on a negative note.

It takes some bravery to dip into a thread discussing issues and I wanted to say thanks for clearing what you did up. I may not agree, but I can understand it at least. It's important to remember the human on the other end. Moderating can be hard, and so can finding the line you feel you should walk. Thanks for running a Community on Lemmy. Shit's not easy sometimes.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 27 points 1 day ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (3 children)

If on the web (not a mobile client), you can click the three dots with the arrow pointing down under any post (including yours) and hit "NAME Moderation History". It'll show you what mod actions have been taken on you.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Still nope. Geez, you are really dedicated to thinking the worst thing you can about people, hey?

I didn't say unfairly banned. I was confused as to why I was banned.

I did downvote one post near the time of the ban. I didn't look prior to that. 4 posts downvoted in ten months isn't normally something I'd associate with a ban. People don't generally ban for things that happened ten months ago. Especially since the votes were reasonably more private back then.

It's all one story. The same story. It evolved as I discovered more about what occurred. It's called learning. Make an attempt to do so as well please.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Just FYI, I'm not downvoting you.

The bad faith actors should be somewhat easy to pick out. They are in my Community anyway. They often have scads of downvotes they throw out in a short time, not a few over the course of months. Dunno if you are, but if you're using automation to ban, you may just want to tune it to be a little more lenient.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Maybe. Just I case, I wouldn't interact. I would report it to an Admin most likely.

From what I've seen, most Admins will either not let that stand or sadly lead the charge on the psycho shit.

If it's the first, you're good. It'll be gone soon.

If it's the latter, get the hell outta that instance and block it.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 32 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (6 children)

It's perfectly distinguishable unless you're trying real hard to misinterpret what I said. As a Mod of a small Community myself, here's the difference in downvotes:

  1. Bad Faith Actor: Sees a post or a whole Community they don't like. Goes in and systematically downvotes a bunch of stuff on purpose. Topics, responses... everything. Downvotes because they hate the community and everything it stands for. See 50 downvotes in your Community in one day? That's these fuckers. Ban them. They are assholes and are vote manipulating. Probably ban them from related Communities for vote manipulation.

  2. Normal User: (--> We are here) May or may not comment in YOUR Community, especially if it's image-based. Sees a single post that they don't like out of thousands they see daily and downvotes it. Several months later, it may happen again. This is expected behaviour and is how an upvote / downvote system functions. Don't ban these or you're the asshole.

  3. Brigade Users: A coordinated attack to downvote or spam a Community stemming from some other place. They downvote everything and often post garbage. Ban these people. They are assholes and are vote manipulating. Probably ban them from related Communities for vote manipulation if not trying to seek an instance ban.

  4. Lurker: (The overwhelming majority of users are this) Indistinguishable from a Normal user in votes, but may not comment. May be an alt or bot account. Be wary. Check their post history to see if they're real people. If real, leave 'em alone. If empty, use your discretion. Don't ban from related Communities.

  5. Other: Downvotes accidentally when scrolling sometimes. These happen. May appear as a Lurker or a Normal User. Don't ban these or you're the asshole.

Hope that helps!

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 38 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (28 children)

I don't understand the thought process here. Like many, I don't browse Communities individually, I browse /All and sort by New.

So I am required to see something I like and upvote or else I am not allowed to an express an opinion in the community (or any tangentially linked community)?

If I see something I don't like (which is what the voting system is for), I should go to the Community it's posted in and make sure to upvote things before I downvote? That's the expected order of operations?

If not... what if, while browsing /All /New nothing randomly appears that the viewer likes enough to upvote? Is that then somehow the fault of the viewer and they should then be banned?

Am I interpreting your rulings correctly? 4 downvotes in the span of 10 months (judging by the times on those posts you listed) is a bannable offence? Seems rather heavy-handed to me.

 

Was recently banned from a whole bunch of DB0 communities for, as best as I can gather, downvoting once when I viewed by All (potentially accidentally while scrolling).

Important notes:

  1. I don't use scripts.
  2. I don't mass-downvote Communities. If I see a post I generally don't like when browsing All, I may downvote one post, block the Community and move on.
  3. Some of the communities I was banned from don't have any posts in them so I wouldn't have been able to downvote anything.
  4. Of all of these Communities, in my history I downvoted one post in one of them. Voting in this manner is not vote manipulation. It's quite literally a feature of the platform and as a mod of another Community, I would consider it pretty good etiquette.
  5. One of my bans reads "Appeal Granted, not a brigading member" but I'm still banned.
  6. I don't troll.

WTF is going on here?

EDIT - Updated Info from the conversation below: In the initial image, you can see two "ban waves."

The 10 bans three months ago stem from a single downvote in one Community. It was @Draconic_NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com See here: https://discuss.tchncs.de/post/34853477

I was called out by name for a single downvote and culled from a score of Communities I did not participate in by them.

The other bans from two months ago are from four total downvotes over a 10-month timeframe in one Community.

I have also stated in this thread that I don't have issues with AI-gen images, but there are shoddy ones and well-done ones.

 

Reminder: This post is from the Community Actual Discussion. We try to use voting for elevating constructive, or lowering unproductive, posts and comments here. When disagreeing, replies detailing your views are highly encouraged as no-discussion downvotes don't help anyone learn anything valuable. For other rules, please see this pinned thread. Thanks!

We're testing the waters with the new influx of people to see if this is valuable or not. We are also actively seeking moderators and people who enjoy discussion (and understand that being wrong is an important part of being a better person)! Send me a message if you'd like to help out.

This weekly thread will focus on games (board or video) that are fantastic, but have one extremely annoying aspect that doesn't fit, doesn't make sense, or makes the game worse.

No starters this time as there's tons of examples. Let me know yours and maybe what you did as a workaround or house rule (if applicable)!

 

I tend to browse /All and by New on Lemmy. I went to respond on a thread on !vegan@lemmy.world to thank someone for a recipe that looked good, and found out I had been banned.

Odd, considering I hadn't posted to that sub at any point in the past. I checked the modlog to find that "Mod" had banned a bunch of people citing "Rule 5."

Their Rule 5 states: Bad-faith carnist rhetoric & anti-veganism are not allowed, as this is not a space to debate the merits of veganism. Anyone is welcome here, however, and so good-faith efforts to ask questions about veganism may be given their own weekly stickied post in the future (see current stickied discussion).

I (and hundreds of others) seemingly broke rule 5 of this community without ever posting there. What is going on?

And my apologies if this isn't the place for this, but I had no idea where else to post the question.

0
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by AceTKen@lemmy.ca to c/actual_discussion@lemmy.ca
 

First and foremost, let me say that I appreciate you actually engaging in a real discussion on Lemmy!

WHY?

This Community was made in response to the rest of Lemmy and the way many otherwise interesting discussion threads fall apart into downvoting, groupthink, and burying of posts composed by people asking for clarification or looking to understand the reasoning behind things.

We don’t like people making baseless accusations; we defend people on all sides when people are wrong about their opposition. We don't appreciate it when people think they know what others think and project incorrect (and often evil) bullshit on each other. We dislike people being wilfully wrong because their group fetishizes a certain angle of the truth instead of the boring reality of the situation.

It is important to maintain solid reasoning and conclusions, not just one or the other.

Ideas and discussion are important. We don’t feel we can get out of the current slump we’re in with political discourse unless we are able to clearly articulate ourselves and discuss the world we're all living in.

DO:

  • Be civil. This does not mean you shouldn’t challenge people, just don’t be a dick about it. Disagreeing with reasons is fine, mocking or insulting someone is not.
  • Upvote interesting points and things that are well-articulated, even if you may not agree.
  • Upvote when you see others correct themselves or change their mind.
  • Be prepared to back up any claims you make with an unbiased source that you've actually read.
  • Be willing to be wrong. Admit when you are incorrect or spoke poorly. If you are the OP of a thread, feel free to edit the main post, and add an edit to the end to show your opinion has changed.
  • Be a “Devil’s Advocate” if there's no opposition and you can see some arguments for the other side you'd like to see addressed. You do not have to believe either side of an issue in order to generate solid points on a view.
  • Discuss hot-button issues.
  • Use bracket tags in the title to show the kind of post you're making (see below), and try to use the disclaimer if it's your style to help those coming in from outside the Community who may not understand it.
  • Add humour, and be creative! Dry writing isn’t super fun to read or discuss.
  • Post any rule, formatting, or changes here that you would like to see.

DO NOT:

  • Call people names or label people. We fight ideas, not people here.
  • Ask for sources, and then not respond to the person providing them. This means you're not here to better yourself or the discussion, and it's rude to waste someone's time by challenging them and then just walking away.
  • Mindlessly downvote people you disagree with. We only downvote people that do not add to the discussion.
  • Be a bot, spam, or engage in self-promotion unless explicitly allowed by the mods.
  • Duplicate posts from within the last month unless new non-trivial information is surfaced on the topic.
  • Strawman.
  • Expect that personal experience or your personal morals are a substitute for proof.
  • Exaggerate. Not everything is a genocide, and not everyone slightly to the right of you is a Nazi.
  • Copy an entire article in your post body. It’s just messy. Link to it and maybe summarize if needed.

SUBMISSION RULES:

All main posts should append a bracket tag to the front to describe the topic type:

  • (WEEKLY) Will be reserved for Mods as it will be used for the pinned featured weekly topic thread.
  • (CMV) Change My View can read like a rant or some scattered thoughts on a topic that the creator is looking to challenge themselves on. You must start with some initial reasons along with some thoughts on how those reasons led you to feel the way you do. If you can articulate things that would or wouldn't change your mind, please add those as well. If your mind is changed, we ask that you place a link to the post that did so at the end of the main post as an edit.
  • (OPEN-ENDED) for a general prompt to show that you're looking to see what people think. A good place to seek answers to questions that you haven't thought of yet.
  • (ARTICLE) for a link to an article to be discussed. Please link the main source, not a news link already talking about the source and give a few initial thoughts.
  • (STEELMAN) is discussion on hard mode and is the opposite of a strawman argument. This is someone making as close to an iron-clad argument as they can for a side or an opinion and challenging you to poke holes in it where you can. These should come with sources already.
  • (OTHER) is, for now, what we call everything else. I think we covered most of it above, but just in case, there's OTHER.

We would encourage you to also have our Disclaimer bolded at the front to help show how we're different to those coming in from browsing New or All posts which should hopefully help curtailing the drive-by downvoting that was so common in our early days:

Reminder: This post is from the Community Actual Discussion. You’re encouraged to use voting for elevating constructive, or lowering unproductive, posts and comments here. When disagreeing, replies detailing your views are appreciated. For other rules, please see this pinned thread. Thanks!

And finally, none of these are so set in stone that we can't change them. If you want to see adjustments or changes, let us know here or in Private Message!

 

#What do you want to talk about?

We're brand new, but I hope you'll have a word or two. Looking for mods who can write and love discussing a variety of topics!

view more: next ›