You're viewing a single thread.
Banning people for downvoting posts seems like an overstep of position
Seems like beaver went crazy and jerkface did too. I dont know about you.
Banning people for downvoting posts is the most sensitive thing I’ve actually seen on the internet first hand.
And yet they probably still think people dislike them just because they’re vegan 🤷♂️
This is exactly why non anonymous voting is a big problem for the fediverse
I'm sure you are aware that brigading has been a problem in The Motherland since the very beginning. Now that we have the tools to detect and address such behaviour, are you prepared to say you are categorically against using that information to inform moderation decisions?
Downvoting a post ain’t brigading 😂
Is there not an option in Lemmy to make a community private, or exclude it from /all?
That sounds like what you need if you can’t handle general users disagreeing with you.
I will start working on private communities soon.
We appreciate your work 🫡
Is there not an option in Lemmy to make a community private, or exclude it from /all?
There is no option to hide a community from All at the moment.
Private communities exist, but require to add every member as a mod, unrealistic for anything with more than a few members.
Downvoting a post can be brigading. Voting posts up or down is indeed the primary thing that brigades do.
I did not say that this was an example of brigading. I don't know that. I pointed out that the views you are sharing imply that you would also be against taking action against brigading.
Sorry you're having trouble following this. It's honestly not very complicated. I think if you read the thread from the beginning with an open mind instead of preconceived biases, you will find it easier to follow.
Then tools should be built against brigading. For example, observing high quantity downvotes per unit time, as compared to the general traffic on the post. Then scrubbing or smoothing the votes as such.
That conveniently ignores what the actual issue was, since if Beaver had replied to the request to discuss those actions with the other mods we wouldn't be having this discussion. Not consulting with other mods before making COMMUNITY decisions was, to my mind, the main reason for being demoded.
If Beaver committed some kind of moderator offense by not responding in the second moderator's unstated timeframe, then surely that second moderator committed an equal offense by demodding THREE moderators without consulting anyone else. No one even knew that this was up his ass before he went nuclear. I don't know how you all can look at this and say it is anything less than a transparent coup.
I DID receive a message from Beaver a day before the other moderator went wild with power, stating her intentions to perform a three day moderation blitz where things would be extra strict. Due to the limitations of the medium we're working in, I don't know if anyone replied to that, but it hasn't been mentioned. According to the evidence I have, Beaver was trying to communicate and the other moderator was not.
I note that Beaver has now left the site completely, probably due to the dog piling and bullying. So, job well done. You made people unhappy. Good work, the Internet is safe once again.
I note that Beaver has now left the site completely, probably due to the dog piling and bullying. So, job well done. You made people unhappy. Good work, the Internet is safe once again.
Oh lord. The victim complex is STRONG here.
I would suggest perhaps they left because they were unwilling to take responsibility for the fallout and repercussions of their own actions, which seem to have razzed a number of people.
Oh, I get it now. You're one of Beaver's alts.
This is a common thing happening on Lemmy.
I don't necessarily agree, if a post is clearly within the guidelines of the community, and the mods consider it a quality post, that person probably doesn't get the community.
Look buddy, I'm just in this post to circlejerk. If you want to argue, kindly go back to the OP