this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2024

-8 points (31.8% liked)

Ye Power Trippin' Bastards

290 readers

11 users here now

This is a community in the spirit of "Am I The Asshole" where people can post their own bans from lemmy or reddit or whatever and get some feedback from others whether the ban was justified or not.

Sometimes one just wants to be able to challenge the arguments some mod made and this could be the place for that.

Rules

Post only about bans or other sanctions from mod(s).
Provide the cause of the sanction (e.g. the text of the comment).
Provide the reason given by the mods for the sanction.
Don't use private communications to prove your point. We can't verify them and they can be faked easily.
Don't deobfuscate mod names from the modlog with admin powers.
Don't harass mods or brigade comms. Don't word your posts in a way that would trigger such harassment and brigades.
Do not downvote posts if you think they deserved it. Use the comment votes (see below) for that.
You can post about power trippin' in any social media, not just lemmy. Feel free to post about reddit or a forum etc.

Expect to receive feedback about your posts, they might even be negative.

Make sure you follow this instance's code of conduct. In other words we won't allow bellyaching about being sanctioned for hate speech or bigotry.

Some acronyms you might see.

PTB - Power-Tripping Bastard: The commenter agrees with you this was a PTB mod.
YDI - You Deserved It: The commenter thinks you deserved that mod action.
BPR - Bait-Provoked Reaction: That mod probably overreacted in charged situation, or due to being baited.
CLM - Clueless mod: The mod probably just doesn't understand how their software works.

Relevant comms

!fediverselore@lemmy.ca

founded 3 months ago

MODERATORS

db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com

-8

banned from climate@slrpnk.net for calling out the government on climate change. (slrpnk.net)

submitted 1 week ago by index@sh.itjust.works to c/yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com

21 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Seem like not endorsing the government or the blue party will get you banned for trolling at climate@slrpnk.net

top 21 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah, those slrpnk admins, if there's one thing they will instantly ban, it's people who have negative things to say about the Democrats, or want extra-political solutions to climate change. It's the one thing they really can't stand. /s

I looked at your profile, and all I can say is wow.

[+] index@sh.itjust.works -8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah, those slrpnk admins, if there’s one thing they will instantly ban, it’s people who have negative things to say about the Democrats, or want extra-political solutions to climate change. It’s the one thing they really can’t stand. /s

Wouldn't be surprised if this is the case. Some solarpunk is greenwashing

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

dood. the problem is, you wrote

Anyone who call to imperatively vote for the red and blue party is an enemy of the climate cause and of humanity.

Which in an electoral college system means you want votes to be wasted and increase the risk the orange menace wins, who is the bigger enemy of the climate cause and of humanity.

Basically your words contradict your goals at the moment and it even raises the suspicion you're trying to manipulate ppl for the GOP or foreign actors (which favor the GOP).

This is not the time to vote 3rd party or abstain. This is lesser evil time. The US isn't a country where this is done with coalitions like in EU or so. If you wanted a 3rd party to win this election, that ship has sailed. For the next, maybe, but don't confuse ppl who should vote now.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I think Greta Thunberg said it quite well:

It is probably impossible to overstate the consequences this specific election will have for the world and for the future of humanity.

The Democrats winning this election is in no possible universe sufficient for human survival and an end to industrial-scale murder and collective climate suicide, but it sure looks necessary.

Here's her full quote, including her main point, which is the absolute urgency of going further than that, pressuring the whole system to do a hell of a lot better than the Democrats, not stopping with the election:

Full size image

Saying we need to go way further than Democrats for success makes perfect sense. Saying there's no point in electing Democrats, while pretending you think the climate is important, is a sign that you're either lying on purpose or horribly and dangerously confused.

Edit: Fixed the image, I'm not sure why it won't go bigger

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

No, you're intentionally ignorant.

If both are unsuitable for the climate cause, it doesn't mean you get a 3rd option. It means the climate is irrelevant for this election. In that case you lost the chance to have a climate relevant option many years ago. Voting a 3rd party or not voting will not pressure the candidates to do anything for the climate now. Even the threat of letting the authoritarian fascist win comes too late, because third parties are already out.

Also, if the US doesn't elect the democrat candidate now, trump will be elected and there will be no way of doing anything for the climate with the US any more, likely forever.

The ship has sailed. You can only choose how bad you lose now.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 7 points 1 week ago

Relax. I am agreeing with you, or was aiming to.

The whole US political system is unsuitable for dealing with climate change, but the Democrats are at least trying to some extent to push it in the right direction. Letting Trump get elected would be a massive catastrophe. That's what I, and Greta Thunberg, and you, are saying, I think.

Coming out with "you're intentionally ignorant" isn't generally a good way to start the conversation, even if you don't agree with the person.

[–] index@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

voting a 3rd party or not voting will not pressure the candidates to do anything for the climate now.

Wrong, by losing votes the red and blue party are forced to change their policies to get votes back otherwise they lose elections. On the contrary if they don't lose any support they are not really forced or motivated to do any change.

Also, if the US doesn’t elect the democrat candidate now, trump will be elected and there will be no way of doing anything for the climate with the US any more, likely forever.

Read what Greta Thunberg said

[–] DmMacniel@feddit.org 5 points 1 week ago

Wrong, by losing votes the red and blue party are forced to change their policies to get votes back otherwise they lose elections. On the contrary if they don’t lose any support they are not really forced or motivated to do any change.

And the red or blue party still have a majority even though some votes go to third parties. I don't see how that make them lose elections?

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

dood, the election contest is over now. you're chasing ghosts of the past

[–] lemonmelon@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Really? Who's the president elect?

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago

No dood, the contest, not the election itself smh

[–] index@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Which in an electoral college system means you want votes to be wasted and increase the risk the orange menace wins, who is the bigger enemy of the climate cause and of humanity.

There's not such thing as "wasted votes". In elections every person is free to vote as they want for whoever they like, that's the core of democracy. Trump alone is a corrupted politicians who represent the interests of elites and corporations, there's a climate crisis because for decades governments have facilitated and paved the way for earth exploitation.

Basically your words contradict your goals at the moment and it even raises the suspicion you’re trying to manipulate ppl for the GOP or foreign actors (which favor the GOP).

Go ahead and explain what's contradictory about any of my words. If you believe calling out the whole fucking government red and blue buffoons together is supporting any of them i'm lead to believe you are either malicious or extremely brainwashed.

If you wanted a 3rd party to win this election, that ship has sailed.

Unless you come from the future you cannot predict who is gonna win.

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

There's not such thing as "wasted votes".

In electoral college and winner-takes-it-all systems (like the one in use in that election) votes for candidates not endorsed by large groups of voters have no effect on the outcome. You can lie to yourself, but this is not a European country. If a party doesn't get a huge group of voters committed long before the election, it's over for them.

Yes, people can vote for whoever they like, but only two options ultimately count. The rest is basically discarded on the electors stage.

[–] AnarchistsForKamala@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

votes for candidates not endorsed by large groups of voters have no effect on the outcome

i think 2016 jill stein voters are owed an apology then. and the 2000 nader voters

[–] index@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

All it takes for a party to get a huge group of voters is a pop start with a huge group of fans endorsing the party

[–] DmMacniel@feddit.org 4 points 1 week ago

And this will never happen in the US, which is in dire need of an election reform.

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Wanna bet? It's either Trump or Harris. You think like a loser.

[–] index@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 week ago

If you want i'm gonna bet that regardless of who win climate crisis will get worst and people will get poorer

[–] Blaze@feddit.org 7 points 1 week ago

You should probably link to your comment: https://slrpnk.net/post/14805575/11883989

[–] Five@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

YDI: You called @silence7 a shill for phonebanking. As a mod, he has no obligation to take your abuse.

[–] index@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

I said they are shilling for a party that is responsible for the climate crisis and a genocide among other things. How's that trolling? And how's that abuse?