For all your boycotting needs. I’m sure there’s some mods caught in lemmy.ml’s top 10 that are perfectly upstanding and reasonable people, my condolences for the cross-fire.
- !memes@lemmy.world and !memes@sopuli.xyz. Or of course communities that rule.
- !asklemmy@lemmy.world
- !linux@programming.dev. Quite small, plenty of more specific ones available. Also linux is inescapable on lemmy anyway :)
- !programmer_humor@programming.dev
- !world@lemmy.world
- !privacy@lemmy.world and maybe !privacyguides@lemmy.one, lemmy.one itself seems to be up in the air. !fedigrow@lemm.ee says !privacy@lemmy.ca. They really seem to be hiding even from another, those tinfoil hats :)
- !technology@lemmy.world
- Seems like !comicstrips@lemmy.world and !comicbooks@lemmy.world, various smaller comic-specifc communities as well as !eurographicnovels@lemm.ee
- !opensource@programming.dev
- !fuckcars@lemmy.world
(Out of the loop? Here’s a thread on lemmy.ml mods and their questionable behaviour)
But the mods don’t allow that kind of discourse, that’s the whole problem.
Also, tankies are advocating for a society where I and those like me would be killed. If that’s not worthy of a derogatory term then what is?
Nothing is. Shaming and harassing others is not the solution. Instead we should let them advocate for whatever their ideal is. The same we let nazis have their own little „reich“ in their own homes. If they start breaking rules they get the same backlash as anyone else. Dont make it about „identity“.
Its dehumanizing and leads to hate and violence. Same as with psychopaths, narcissists, pedophiles, etc. These people are living creatures just as we are. Some of them are sick, some of them are dangerous. That does not mean they can be treated as lesser.
But that’s what’s happening now? They broke their own rules - not merely removing comments, but also mass-banning from communities people have never commented in before, and then deleting the mod log entries afterwards. The former is not ideal but expected, the middle is… extremely excessive and warrants all of this right there alone, but the latter bumps the whole matter up significantly to be outright disingenuous, so that “that side” making its case is no longer expected to yield any results, given the not only manipulative but outright deceptive practices that have been (allegedly) proven.
I do worry about the use of a pejorative term though. In thinking about it more, I waffle back and forth between it should never be done, vs. whether someone can “earn” that badge not by holding a belief but by their actions?
We should definitely respect their contributions to the code and actually I would guess that they may legit believe that what they are doing (supporting China by suppression of alternate viewpoints, using any means necessary including ones that violate and abuse their own code of conduct) is right. But that does not make it so.
So moderating their instance?
Where’s the evidence for this? I didn’t see that in the original post.