auk

joined 9 months ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] auk@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think some of it was for DM harrassment or posting fan fiction about other people on Lemmy.

Again, assumption. And no, none of that ever happened.

Modlog, search for "harassing."

Good to know, maybe I missed the tone in your text. I def took it as you were trying to ban me from this instance, lemm.ee, and sh.itjust.works because of what you thought of my previous behavior on an instance that I was banned from weeks ago. Since you are writing to all of the admins there.

That is exactly what I was trying to do, yes. Not for your behavior on the previous instances exactly, but for starting up the same behavior from new accounts since you'd already been banned for it, which is against the rules. I think I explained the commonsense reasons also.

[–] auk@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

And you can easily not “endure” me by blocking my name.

Part of the point of the violation here is that, if someone's already blocked your name, they now have to do it again for three new accounts, until you make more beyond those three.

I already think that trolling and saying that anyone who doesn't like it should just block you is unreasonable. Trolling and saying that anyone who doesn't like it needs to block every new account you make to keep trolling with when one gets banned is a whole different level.

[–] auk@slrpnk.net -5 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Sending out ban notifications to dozens of users about bans in a community they've never heard of doesn't seem like good bot design.

I am unsurprised that a UniversalMonk fan would think that would be a totally reasonable thing to do, though, and at the same time that banning someone who managed to get an account ban from the least ban-happy instance there is when they make a new account and start doing the same stuff is somehow unreasonable.

[–] auk@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Your ban is in the modlog. It's about halfway down, search for "pleasant".

I'm mostly relying on common sense here. Your participation in previous politics communities was incredibly obnoxious. The issue was never that you were talking about third parties and posting news articles. I don't even know all the details of why you were banned. I think some of it was for DM harrassment or posting fan fiction about other people on Lemmy. Now that you've been banned, you've made new accounts and went looking for new politics communities to start doing the same thing in, while seeking for exact clarifications about the rules that would let you carefully adhere to the letter of them so you could keep doing it, while the overwhelming majority of the community keeps asking you not to.

I'm not trying to be mean about it, and I'm not upset or anything. If you're interested in changing how you contribute so that you're a net positive to the community, let's talk. If you're planning to continue your current type of contributions, but trying to engineer ways around the rules with multiple accounts or whatever so that you can keep doing it, then the answer is no thank you.

[–] auk@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 week ago (8 children)

As I said under the other post, I do believe this evasion was entirely unintentional, for the reasons you outlined. The part that was intentional was trolling in lemmy.world politics and some other communities until your whole user got banned, and then making new accounts and going looking for other politics communities to start up exactly the same antics in, explicitly affirming your plan to continue the same pattern of behavior. And, in the course of doing that, you managed to break some rules, set up to protect against that kind of behavior.

I'm not planning to set the bot up to notify dozens of users about their bans in a community they have never posted in and don't care about. Mostly it doesn't come up, because you have to be pretty obnoxious for the bot to ban you. Almost no one even close to that boundary even posts there, because almost everyone understands how to interact with other users without collecting hundreds or thousands of downvotes.

I get that you didn't get a notification, and so probably didn't know you were banned. You did know you were being obnoxious previously, and refused to stop doing it until it escalated to an account ban, and then made some new accounts and started looking for new places to do it.

I think admins and mods those new places can make the decision about whether that is ban evasion, or whether they want to let you do this all again until you inevitably get banned again sometime later. People have talked with you about why what you're doing is a problem. Why they would pick that second option is something of a mystery to me, but I'll leave it up to them. I'm just relaying the information.

It would be a different story if you were just misunderstanding something, and completely open to a conversation about why you keep getting banned and what you can do differently, but you're clearly more interested in figuring out the details of the rules so you can find ways around them and keep doing your same thing.

[–] auk@slrpnk.net 5 points 1 week ago

Fully agree. I'm finishing up a few replies to other people who had things to say about it, and then I plan to wash my hands of it.

[–] auk@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 week ago

This is a really good point. I was going to get sucked into replying after his innocent-faced reply, but there's really no point to it.

[–] auk@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 week ago (5 children)

The bot banned you from !pleasantpolitics@slrpnk.net I don't know how long ago. You had a lower rank, after a while, than even Media Bias Fact Check bot. Somehow. That's your violation of the letter of the law.

I can't even find the entry in the modlog because your record of moderation actions is so extensive that it's almost impossible to make sense of. I seriously tried, and since your account ban and the endless list of deletions and bans people have been giving you, I couldn't find it. It's hard to find stuff for now-deleted accounts, I guess. It's there though. You were banned quite a while ago from !pleasantpolitics@slrpnk.net under the now-deleted account. I can find a date or a moderation record if you want to see it. Anyway, you put yourself in a position to be able to DM people again after being banned for some kind of offense in DMs, and started posting in new politics communities with the exact same stuff after being banned for a pattern of behavior that I would say the mods were excessively generous about, to the point of moderation malpractice. That's your violation of the spirit of the law.

You did ban evasion both in letter and in spirit. And, you're pretending with an innocent face not to understand how anyone could have a negative reaction to you, when you're clearly aiming for exactly that negative reaction with a lot of your past posts. That's the proactive element that would lead me, if I were an admin, to ban you on sight.

You need to reevaluate your approach to posting, or else get accustomed to people wanting to ban you. It's the world's most natural reaction to what you like doing.

[–] auk@slrpnk.net 7 points 1 week ago (9 children)

Being the same person who was banned, and posting from a new account, is ban evasion.

You can find a place that can put up with you, if you want to try. That's the sense in which your voice won't be silenced. The same people who've seen what you have to say and want no part of it are not obligated to continue listening to it forever, with you disabling their attempts not to hear from you anymore. That's protecting their rights to use Lemmy as they want to use it.

 

UniversalMonk has been evading the a ban on him by posting from new accounts on !pleasantpolitics@slrpnk.net. That's ban evasion, which on most instances leads to an account-level ban, as far as I know. The relevant account is UniversalMonk@lemm.ee.

I'm not sure how to notify admins on lemm.ee, so I'm posting here. If ban evasion justifies an account ban on lemm.ee, then it's time. If there's a better place to send this note, let me know, and I'll do that instead.

[–] auk@slrpnk.net 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

"No fair pointing out that the other guy wants to kill the children and burn the world! I want to know: How good is the alternative. It better be fantastic. Like really good. Or else I don't care."

(Kamala Harris's record is fine, but it barely matters. If one item on the menu is rat poison and the other is edible food, I don't need to know how many Michelin stars the food got.)

[–] auk@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 weeks ago (8 children)

So instead of "Democrats," it should say "Netanyahu."

And also, Trump has a machine gun, and the Democrats are sitting in the corner saying, "Hey, don't do that. I don't think you should do that." They don't seem to be doing much other than that.

And the same people who are screaming about how the Democrats bought the bullets in the first place are also, for the most part, screaming that Trump will do 10 times worse, and please don't elect him. Also he wants to walk outside and start shooting all kinds of random people all over the apartment complex. Also he wants to give Netanyahu his second machine gun so Netanyahu can go through the apartment finishing off the guy's family. He's really mad about the whole "Hey, don't do that," thing.

I am glad that you are safe enough to not be able to see a difference between Kamala Harris's sometime reprehensible foreign policy, and Trump who simply wants to burn the world and kill the children. Not everyone has that luxury. Please don't subject them to Trump, while you're making your little meme.

[–] auk@slrpnk.net 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

It's possible. I think it's more difficult than people think. You have to do it on a scale which is blatantly obvious to anyone who's looking, so you're just inviting a ban.

One person swore to me that it would be really easy, so I invited them to try, and they made a gang of bots which farmed karma and then mass-downvoted me, trying to get me banned from my own place. If you look at my profile you'll see some things which have -300 score because of it. I welcomed the effort, since I'm interested in how well it will resist that kind of attack. Their first effort did exactly nothing, because none of the downvote bots had any rank within the algorithm. I gave them some pointers on how they could improve for a second time around, and they went radio silent and I haven't heard from them since then.

view more: next ›