this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2024
62 points (75.4% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

6670 readers
1193 users here now

A community for your defence shitposting needs

Rules

1. Be niceDo not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.

2. Explain incorrect defense articles and takes

If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a "credible" source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it's non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong in the Matrix chat.

3. Content must be relevant

Posts must be about military hardware or international security/defense. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or discuss other areas of international policy.

4. No racism / hatespeech

No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.

5. No politics

We don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.

6. No seriousposting

We don't want your uncut war footage, fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.

7. No classified material

Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how "open source" and "easy to find" it is.

8. Source artwork

If you use somebody's art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art's source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.

9. No low-effort posts

No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title. Put these in weekly Matrix chat instead.

10. Don't get us banned

No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a "haha people that I hate died… haha" punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.

11. No misinformation

NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.


Join our Matrix chatroom


Other communities you may be interested in


Banner made by u/Fertility18

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I'm sorry some posts are being removed from this community. It is the actions of the Lemmy blahaj zone admins. There's nothing we can do to prevent this. I suggest changing your instance to a better one.

Update: Blahaj blocked NCD

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone 48 points 3 weeks ago (8 children)

Blahaj zone admin here. There's quite a bit of confusion and misunderstanding in this thread.

No one is "selectively removing NCD content" or anything close to it.

What happened is that 6 months ago, CDRMITTENS was instance banned from lemmy.blahaj.zone over an anti Palestinian meme they posted. You can see the mod log for that here https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/modlog?postId=11419938. This meme conflated Hamas and Palestinians in general, and basically blamed Palestinians for their own genocide. Notably, the post also broke NCD rules 2 and 5, but wasn't removed by NCD mods.

As a result of CDRMITTENS being instance banned, none of their content reaches lemmy.blahaj.zone anymore. You can see that for yourself here https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/u/CDRMITTENS@sh.itjust.works, which shows that no content from this user has reached blahaj.zone. There was no selective removal or editing of content at play, because none of their content reached blahaj.zone to be able to selectively remove it.

tl;dr - It's just an instance ban, not selective moderation

[–] nuke@sh.itjust.works 11 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

Removed post https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/4336208

Removed post https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/11381339

Removed post https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/11419938

Removed post https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/16644488

Oh and instead of removing the post that violated your rules, you banned the person who submits the most content to NCD

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 37 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Nuke, not to be a dick, but did you talk to Ada before making this post? Because it sounds like there might be some miscommunication here.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 3 weeks ago (10 children)

The first link isn't removed and the second link references Pepe. The third link is the same link as your first link

Oh and instead of removing the post that violated your rules,

Anyone that posts bigotry gets instance banned.

I have no idea about NCD. I don't use it, I have no idea who posts in it, and it doesn't come in to it. Anyone that posts bigotry gets instance banned, and your most active poster, posted bigotry.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 17 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

and the second link references Pepe

... wait, is that really enough to justify removal?

[–] ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

It is when I'd just removed another post by the same user, conflating palestinians and hamas, blaming palestinians for their own genocide

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Ah. I thought you meant there was a general rule against Pepe.

[–] ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

Pepe is a red flag. Not enough to ban outright with no other context, but when posted by a user who is posting bigotry elsewhere, it warrants a removal

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I understand that point of view, definitely. Just wanted to make sure I didn't need to be checking my meme folders carefully before posting on 196, not that I have many Pepe memes lol.

[–] derek@infosec.pub 9 points 3 weeks ago

I'm not associated with anyone in this thread or the situation being discussed. I'm interested how we understand and use cultural signals. Here's some Pepe detail for the similarly curious:

The alt-right got wise to new media in the 2010s. They started meme-washing their hate mongering and trying to normalize coded hate speech in internet culture using Pepe memes and other popular formats. It snowballed and the Pepe meme = Nazi user association is a product of lasting trends from that time. It's similar to clocking someone for wearing straight-laced Doc Martens or khakis and a white polo.

For those in the know one of those items is a small red flag. The wearer could be completely ignorant that these are known dog whistles/identifiers for members of hate groups. If someone is wearing a lot of small red flags then it's less likely the wearer is accidentally serving white supremacist. That's the point of stealing and manufacturing these kinds of symbols though: most people don't know they exist or what they intend to mean so the user can feign ignorance with plausible deniability. They're the inverse of modern progressive advocacy symbols. Wearers can hide in plain sight with just enough Nazi showing that other insiders see them. Pride icons for cowards.

The artist who created Pepe has publicly denounced the character's use as a hate symbol and regressivist propaganda tool. Whether or not a community or individual "liberates" Pepe from the prison CHUDs built is up to them.

For what it's worth: I lean toward liberate most of the time (fight against the thieving bigots) but in this situation, even given a permissive setting, adding "posts Pepe" as a mark against is sensible. It's clear the user is either intentionally pushing hate propaganda or else under enough alt-right influence that their intentions aren't relevant to the evaluation.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com 39 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Meh, if they decide to ban a specific user from another instance because they don't like that user's content, it's fully their right to do so.

If you're devout blahaj user but love NCD, might be a good idea to create an alt for fighter porn then. Otherwise meh it is what it is.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SolOrion@sh.itjust.works 31 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Things are fine as long as we're not on blahaj, then? Just clarifying.

[–] nuke@sh.itjust.works 12 points 3 weeks ago

Correct! And there are tons of wonderful instances to choose from! Please everyone be mindful of which admins you choose to police your content.

[–] originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 23 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

always lookin for more mbin testers over at moist!

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 20 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

If you think I'm clicking a link titled moist.catsweat you out your mind

[–] verity_kindle@sh.itjust.works 9 points 3 weeks ago

It's too late to worry about taste and refinement.

[–] Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 9 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I mean, you're here, soooo....

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Bezier@suppo.fi 15 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)
[–] originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 26 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

thanks! i figured the best way to keep commercial interests at bay was to make it, as i like to put it, 'comically unmarketable'

[–] neidu2@feddit.nl 9 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Very marketable, but not from a corporate standpoint. I love it. I think you'll be seeing neidu3 registering soon.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] deegeese@sopuli.xyz 23 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)

Since this sub is not hosted on Blahaj, can you please provide a list here of mod actions on Blahaj showing what you mean?

I wouldn’t expect 3rd party moderation would have much impact thanks to federation.

[–] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

Yeah, it can’t affect you at all unless you’re on blahaj.

I did a quick skim of the most recent posts as viewed on blahaj vs as on sh.itjust.works, and checking the mod log on blahaj didn’t show any of the recent posts as having been specifically removed. There’s one user that was banned like 6 months ago whose posts don’t federate to blahaj but now is a weird time to notice it.

I didn’t check super deep into the logs though so I’m curious what specific posts have been removed, if any, and if OP tried reaching out to the blahaj admins about it.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 16 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Wait, removed by Blahaj admins? What's going on with that?

[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 31 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

If I understand right, they're upset that the blahaj.zone admins blocked content from CDRMITTENS on their instance. Blahaj admins can't remove content from a community hosted on SJW, but they can prevent content posted by individual SJW users from showing up on blahaj.zone

Personally I think nuke is making a mountain out of a mole hill. Blahaj admins can do whatever they want on their instance. I don't really care whether or not I can see content posted by someone who supports the IDF. I'd actually rather not see it tbh

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago

Yeah, this all seems like a very unforced error. I love drama, but not when it interferes with the functioning of the wider Fediverse as a cohesive whole.

[–] brown567@sh.itjust.works 12 points 3 weeks ago (19 children)

They're very anti-"tankie", and I can see how some ncd content gets caught up in that blast

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Was there some sort of beef that the blahaj admins had with sjw or ncd? I’m out of the loop here tbh

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›