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.

  • Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    that is the comments of the OP

    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.

    • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      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.

      • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.eeOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

        What rule does it break by the way?

        The rules say

        • Post only about bans or other sanctions from mod(s). (it was about a ban)
        • Provide the cause of the sanction (e.g. the text of the comment). (that’s exactly what I was doing)
        • Provide the reason given by the mods for the sanction. (I did that, and in fact this explains what I was saying about the other person having broken more rules than me, because their rundown was inaccurate)
        • Don’t use private communications to prove your point. We can’t verify them and they can be faked easily. (I didn’t, in fact the only private communication I used was to prove to you I was asked)
        • Don’t deobfuscate mod names from the modlog with admin powers. (I’m that person, so naturally the rule was upheld)
        • Don’t harass mods or brigade comms. Don’t word your posts in a way that would trigger such harassment and brigades. (again, did not break this rule)
        • Do not downvote posts if you think they deserved it. Use the comment votes (see below) for that. (I didn’t do that… but others are doing it to me and you don’t seem to mind)
        • You can post about power trippin’ in any social media, not just lemmy. Feel free to post about reddit or a forum etc. (certainly did not break this rule)

        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.

        • Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 days ago

          Fair point to be honest. Seems like there’s a rule missing about “only create one thread per mod sanction”

          • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 days ago

            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.

          • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.eeOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 days ago

            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.

            • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 days ago

              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.