this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2023
35 points (100.0% liked)

Lemmy.World Announcements

29026 readers
4 users here now

This Community is intended for posts about the Lemmy.world server by the admins.

Follow us for server news 🐘

Outages πŸ”₯

https://status.lemmy.world

For support with issues at Lemmy.world, go to the Lemmy.world Support community.

Support e-mail

Any support requests are best sent to info@lemmy.world e-mail.

Report contact

Donations πŸ’—

If you would like to make a donation to support the cost of running this platform, please do so at the following donation URLs.

If you can, please use / switch to Ko-Fi, it has the lowest fees for us

Ko-Fi (Donate)

Bunq (Donate)

Open Collective backers and sponsors

Patreon

Join the team

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

There is no rule against anarchism, why was I banned?

Also I don't support the unibombers methods, I am just an anarchist. This goes against the ideas of 196, where the only rule is that you have to post before you leave. @threegnomes@lemmy.blahaj.zone and other mods, I am very upset

top 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] knighthawk0811@lemmy.one 32 points 1 year ago (1 children)

anarchist complains that someone isn't following the rules... ba dum tiss

[–] faceless@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The rules are stupid, that's what I'm saying

[–] knighthawk0811@lemmy.one 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

yeah, but if you're an anarchist then I just don't get it. how can you hold someone to a rule or have any opinion on the quality of the rules when you've already decided that all rules are stupid and you're not following any of them (unless you maybe are just following some in order to stay out of jail because reality exists outside of our internal priorities)

[–] Deceptichum@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What a stupid fucking take.

Anarchism is a stateless society without hierarchy. It’s not a society without rules, people can mutually agree to live within a social framework.

[–] knighthawk0811@lemmy.one 2 points 1 year ago

until an anarchist comes along who thinks those rules are stupid.

[–] faceless@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I dont know

[–] mr_pip@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

that point doesnβ€˜t really hold its worth. a murdererβ€˜s house cannot be searched without a warrant just because he is a murderer, he still has a right to privacy, which police need to keep.

according to your take, police are allowed to search every self proclaimed anarchists houses.

[–] knighthawk0811@lemmy.one 2 points 1 year ago

what? no. That would require that the governing body of the police were itself anarchist... which is a paradox.

however, if the police did that then said anarchist would have to follow the establishment's rules in order to fight back and win. If said anarchist were always 100% true to their beliefs then they would not go the route of abiding the laws because they are against the establishment in every way. they would want to fight back, but not by following the rules.

in your scenario, you made the police out to be anarchists themselves which is a bit backward. the police are fascist, or any other totalitarianism or similar.

[–] half@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Try not to take it too personally: the commies are extra sensitive at the moment because they have to share the fediverse with a giant influx of liberals. You'd probably be upset if they were pouring into your space. Not that anybody owns it, but we all take things for granted. It'll cool off.

edit: the gears of this sarcasm machine are lubricated by Marxist tears

[–] faceless@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I've been reading the modlog (something that Lemmy does really well is make modding transparent) and people have been getting banned for stupid reasons like this

[–] half@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

You kinda get what you deserve for doing real politics in 196

[–] can@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

Par for the course for 196.

[–] nivenkos@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

This has nothing to do with lemmy.world

[–] faceless@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I don't agree with terrorism, I'm stupid but not that stupid. Ted kazinski was an awful man who bombed post offices, why would I ever agree with that?

There's also no way to message mods to talk to them about this, they dont have an email or anything.

[–] socialjusticewizard@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It seems to me you're probably in almost the wrongest place to ask.

[–] faceless@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I have no idea where else to put this

Well, this c is specifically for discussion of this instance, and you're having problems on a different instance. If you're getting nowhere talking to the mods of that specific community you could try looking for a meta community on that instance to talk about it. Lemmy.world has nothing to do with moderation in a different community on a different instance.

[–] eric5949@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Probably on the instance the community is on. See if that instance has a chat or general community.

[–] indite@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I agree with terrorism if its funny

Like imagine blowing up a building and having confetti come out after

Comedy gold

[–] tallwookie@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

wtf is 196? is it a code like 420 and I'm just not in the loop?

[–] indite@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 year ago

leftist meme sub

semi-anarchic, who knows really

[–] BlinkerFluid@lemmy.one 2 points 1 year ago

They post doodles of cats, and something about trans people. That's all I know.

[–] Mac@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago
[–] indite@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

were you a unabomber apologist?

[–] faceless@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] ChemicalRascal@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well, go on, what did you post, then?

[–] faceless@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That I agree with SOME of his ideas. That doesn't mean I like how he tried to show them. Don't bomb posts offices.

[–] ChemicalRascal@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Okay, but what exactly did you post? C'mon now.

[–] faceless@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I can't find it, which is weird. I'll try to find a way back machine image of the post for you

[–] indite@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

well let this be your wake up call, now you can be one consequence free

go forth and sin brother

[–] aeternum@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

protip: it's unAbomber. Means UNiversity and Airline bomber.

[–] indite@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago

good catch, my bad

[–] SchizoRamblings@vlemmy.net 4 points 1 year ago

We are never getting r/195 back

[–] Macabre@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

I'm guessing you pissed off some tankies.

[–] AnonTwo@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

For starters...for an anarchist it's strange you're a stickler for the rules

But also it's always going to be an unspoken rule that the mods can ban you from a site at their discretion. That's why moderation is done by people and not automated (mostly), because there's always going to be exceptions and things that weren't accounted for.

As others have said you just kindof have to read the room sometimes.

[–] Deceptichum@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

Anarchism isn’t a chaotic wasteland without rules and order.

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί