before i made an account, i reached out to the chief admin of lemmy.dbzer0.com
i was recently banned during a discussion on the validity of a claim regarding the consensus about the safety of a vegan diet:
and, if you bother to go find that discussion, you'll find that, in fact, my interlocutor did become incivil. i did report that. and somehow, my discussion and the subsequent report were the basis of a ban.
it was less than 2 hours. it's almost not worth discussing.
but given my pre-application discussion, i felt strongly that my conduct is within the bounds of the acceptable use of the instance. so if my conduct is not within the acceptable use, that means i basically cant use my account(s) as i planned and under the terms which i agreed.
db0 has said he doesn't want to be the benevolent dictator for life, and has specifically both recused himself from ruling on my conduct and encouraged me to post here and in !div0_governance@lemmy.dbzer0.com (though i'm still holding off on that for now).
so, did i deserve it? power tripping bastard? what do you think?
It's a big of a weird case innit? I think that incivility should be allowed, but I also see that a pattern of behaviour where someone goads people to get upset in order to report them for incivility is manipulative and against anarchist ethos. You got to be able to take what you're dishing out. When I answered your email I didn't anticipate that you would be crying to the mods when you got people heated, yanno?
I don't think any of us admins would mind you having strong opinions on some matters and holding your ground, even if it would upset others, but this constant pattern of trying to manipulate situations to get people sanction by hierarchical power (mods) I feel is approaching /crossing an ethical line.
I believe this pattern behaviour is what the mod is objecting to, not your light trolling and strong opinions.
so when people become abusive, I'm just supposed to tolerate that?
my goal isn't to goad. I leave plenty of comments where I simply correct the misinformation, and there is never any followup. which is great because now anyone reading those comments knows something closer to the truth.
and since the governance of communities does, as a practical matter, require mod or admin action, how else am I supposed to deal with the abusive behavior?
You can always tell them that you don't like how they're interacting with you and disengage. People will get upset at your opinions of veganism, but being upset isn't "abuse".
One could do the same pattern of behaviour with anti-Trans essentialist arguments and "just asking questions", and then report Trans allies who get upset at it. most trans/ally mods would ban someone doing this tactic for it, but liberal mods might end up banning the other party for "incivility".
Lol got decked by the admins. Ripbozo
I suppose I can try that, but it's common for people to double down on misinformation in a comment where they start hurling invectives.
I'm instance shopping, but if this is the standard for behavior on your instance I can abide that til I find a new home.
So? Let them be upset then. If you've made a good case for yourself that it got them upset, others will understand why you had to disengage. Just use the "disengage" rule if you don't want then just having the last word.