jerkface

Sorry, I did what? "All of my accounts?" Do I know you?

Did you know that vegans are hated on par with drug addicts? Perhaps. Did you know that people who consume a plant-based diet for their health or for the environment are hated much less than people who are vegan because of concerns about animal welfare? I think that's interesting. People feel judged by the mere existence of ethical vegans. And I think you are demonstrating how those feelings of being judged are expressed as defensiveness and "hatred" (though I know that language seems strong in this context).

Fun is fun, but consumption of carbohydrates doesn't cause diabetes.

How was it "respectful" to accuse two other moderators of being organs of Beaver? Or to start banning people for the sort of disagreement that must necessarily come up so that a consensus can be reached? This was not a good faith moderator action. This was abuse. It happens to be abuse against people you want to see abused. I hope you can see that.

This is exactly the sort of dialogue that should have happened before people got de-modded. I believe I have been as respectful and patient as can be expected given the baseless accusations that have been made against me merely for sharing my opinions in a neutral way. I respect your point of view and if there had been a consensus I could have referred to anywhere, I would have moderated to that consensus and encouraged other moderators to do the same, despite what my personal preferences might have been. I think this was an extremely ugly event that was not handled well, and kind people were disrespected and hurt for no one's gain.

@TheTechnician27@lemmy.world this comment deserves a response.

It's okay. We know. You're good, he's just trying to rationalize his own behaviour. He can do it elsewhere.

Was de-modding two other moderators because of paranoid fantasies about a conspiracy part of the adequate reaction?

When I shared what I thought of events as one of those moderators, I was de-modded. It's clear what is really happening here.

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.

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.

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.