I was in an incident, which I explained elsewhere, that led to people complaining about me in YTPB and by extension in Ask Lemmy. Then, when sharing my perspective, I was asked by those to whom I shared it to share it in YPTB only for those in charge there to give what amounts to a signal of not caring about said perspective, just the one that is there. So I’m going to share it here instead.
YTPB has specific posting guidelines in the sidebar. It’s not there to be your soapbox in general. I get that you want to say your piece, but the space for that is the comments of the OP, or another community like this. However you can make a YTPB post about the removal of your post if you feel it doesn’t go against the comm rules and shouldn’t have been removed from YTPB.
So does this community, which OP also breaks.
Could we maybe consider adding a new thread when the OP reaches a certain number, like 75 comments? That post has 95 comments, OP addding this post as one comment would have been drown and visible to no one.
I don’t see why to make a new thread just to extend the discussion on a PTB judgement. I do see the point of allowing someone to be able to make a counterargument, so in the interest of fairness, I can arrange that the official counter-argument from the targeted mod is stickied to the target post. But I feel that just opening new threads on the same subject without linking them to mod actions is just going to make a drama haven instead.
What rule does it break by the way?
The rules say…
And yet when I try to ask or bring up how the rules were broken, I get lots of thumbs down but no answers, almost as if there is none. Hence I said the Y might as well be removed.
Fair point to be honest. Seems like there’s a rule missing about “only create one thread per mod sanction”
I don’t want a hundred rules that nobody ends up reading except rules lawyers looking for loopholes. I’m not trying to stifle discussion, but I am trying to prevent becoming a drama comm. I don’t this to be a soapbox for people to make threads and counter-threads endlessly.
It breaks rule 1
Rule one says “post only about bans or other sanctions from mod(s)”.
I am a mod.
It was about a ban.
Therefore it was “about bans or other sanctions from mod(s)” as rule one says.
It doesn’t say the discussion itself can’t be from the mod. It just states the action in question must be “from mod(s)”.
Unless there is something lost in translation here, that is.
If not, you might as well have said “I simply don’t like you” as the reason, and you being in charge there, I would’ve accepted my fate, even if I still would’ve spoken about it somewhere.
The last time this happened, the blanket explanation given to me was hinted to be a euphemism for discriminatory sentiment.
It’s nothing to do with you. I don’t know you at all. I don’t play rules-lawyer games. The rules have been clarified to you now and most people seem to understand them as well that posts have to be in AITA style about a mod action affecting them. Exceptions to this are at my discretion in the benefit of the community health.
I gave you already an alternative option to pin your reply to the OP. If you think I’m being a PTB, feel free to make a post about it in YTPB.
Yes, both positions are understandable. There should probably be a debate somewhere (not specifically on !yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) about what is allowed or not regarding Luigi on LW. That would probably clarify things for everyone.
That would be interesting to be honest.
I can spot rules broken by the other person’s thread more easily than I can spot rules broken by mine.