https://sh.itjust.works/post/31716642

Edit: There used to be a screenshot here. I messed up the link in an edit and don’t have a local copy saved.

My comment was roughly 'It already looks like it might be better than things now, at least Biden never advocated for full displacement of all Palestine."

I had already seen half the comment section of the post with ban marks. This single comment copped me a fully-expected permaban. Unfortunately my comment doesn’t show up in modlogs so I had to retype it more or less from memory.

The bloodshed:

Screenshot edited as per mod request.

Most of the banned comments are actually still visible. If you browse the thread you’ll notice there’s nothing particularly inflammatory or banworthy about any of them.

Best part, in the middle of all that banning, our buddy found the time to mod the one guy in that post who supported his opinions. Welp, another echo chamber in the making.

Follow up:

The mod posted in a similar post in this comm. FWIW, while I stand by my actions and opinion, I did msg them to offer them a personal apology.

  • spujb@lemmy.cafeEnglish
    33·
    3 days ago

    yeah thanks for your thoughts i just haven’t seen any evidence of bad actorship. as soon as i see any legitimate harm come about in this community, whether from the mod or otherwise, i will change my tune though promise.

    • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.worksOP
      23·
      3 days ago

      Actual bad actors are unlikely to leave any evidence of their identity. Not slipping up and admitting on a public forum that you’re acting in bad faith is basic competency, unless you’re an AI chatbot.

      • spujb@lemmy.cafeEnglish
        52·
        3 days ago

        so you see how you are advocating for your own obviously disruptive behavior based on the unproven possibility of bad actors being afoot, right?

        they should def keep you banned, sorry man. what you are doing is called shadow boxing; there isn’t any evidence that the “problem” you are fighting even exists in this case, meanwhile you claim the right to derail conversations over it. i wouldn’t want you in my community either.

        • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.worksOP
          22·
          3 days ago

          My discussion so far has been about hypotheticals. My actual comment was limited to a single statement correcting them when they said trump would be better. In a very mild, nonoffensive manner. If you decide that’s worth banning for, you do you.

          • spujb@lemmy.cafeEnglish
            15·
            3 days ago

            Your own (accurate) words:

            “Thanks, you make some good points. There’s certainly room for improvement. In this case, I wasn’t making fun of anybody, but I agree I could have sugar-coated it a bit more.”

            This is exactly what I mean—if you recognize room for improvement, acting on that is key.

            As for your hypotheticals, yes, I understand they’re just ideas. The issue is when those hypotheticals lead to behaviors that derail conversations or disrupt the community. That’s where the problem arises—it’s not about whether bad actors might exist, but about avoiding actions that create unnecessary friction or suspicion in the absence of evidence.

            If you’re mindful of this going forward, I think you’ll have a much better chance of staying unbanned and contributing constructively.