Not positive that you should be enforcing your own personal ethics onto other people. Free speech should be a thing. If a person did bad things and people are glad that he is no longer in a position to do bad things, that is a celebration in itself. Trying to enforce opinions like this is self-congratulatory in that you consider your opinion is superior and worthy of judicial enforcement.
Note that I haven’t in the slightest commented on the man himself, yet still run the risk of banning. It all depends upon the moderator. This happens on Reddit all the time and that’s the problem with this kind of moderation. It has a chilling effect. Give a censor a job and they tend to censor.
So if we celebrated hitler’s death we lack humanity? People should be free to celebrate a death if they feel to. Forcing your idea of a moral code over people is not nice. We are not talking about celebrating violence, a crime or wishing for somebody’s death.
People should be free to express their feelings if they don’t hurt anyone, without having to fear the morality police. The point of modorators should be to create a welcoming and safe space, not to impose your morality on others.
Yes, and you could have answered “thanks for your input, but we are going to stick with our rules because we have our reasons”, instead you basically tell me “Doesn’t matter what you think, these are the rules and you must respect them. No discussion allowed”. I mean sure, you make the rules, but the way you enforce them and react to criticism speaks for itself.
I have empathy for the people whose lives were made miserable by republican policies graham championed and I celebrate one less champion of those policies fucking people over
Cool, well, if it’s a real rule and not total nonsense you should probably get to work banning every single person in this comment section who is doing the thing you’re telling me isn’t allowed. Otherwise, I don’t know, it might be seen as obviously a bullshit rule used to selectively stop specific discussions.
Ok agreed. No surprise night raping or murdering people in colonial genocide projects that Graham Cracker. I hope we’ll all live to celebrate that fucker dying some day too.
Basic humanity? Graham lacked it, doesn’t mean we should.
That is a ratio.
Maybe the rules should be put to a vote by the community?
Would you celebrate the death of Hitler?
About eighty years too late, but at the time I feel like I would’ve.
Not positive that you should be enforcing your own personal ethics onto other people. Free speech should be a thing. If a person did bad things and people are glad that he is no longer in a position to do bad things, that is a celebration in itself. Trying to enforce opinions like this is self-congratulatory in that you consider your opinion is superior and worthy of judicial enforcement.
Note that I haven’t in the slightest commented on the man himself, yet still run the risk of banning. It all depends upon the moderator. This happens on Reddit all the time and that’s the problem with this kind of moderation. It has a chilling effect. Give a censor a job and they tend to censor.
free speech is also a personal ethic. now kiss
Lol welcome to lemmy politics.
True, I should probably quit social media altogether. Having opinions is never welcome unless they are authorised opinions.
Just find a better instance. We’re having a crab rave over on .ml about this war criminal’s death.
Help a boomer out… How do I change instances?
Mic check covered it nicely, you just make an account through that instances site.
Seriously. In so many ways this place is worse than reddit.
You’re free to start your own instance with whatever rules you choose.
Ahhhh, the “when they go low, we go high” approach.
Gee whizz, that approach has really been working out so far, hasn’t it…
Obviously it needs to go higher so that the fall is harder
So if we celebrated hitler’s death we lack humanity? People should be free to celebrate a death if they feel to. Forcing your idea of a moral code over people is not nice. We are not talking about celebrating violence, a crime or wishing for somebody’s death.
People should be free to express their feelings if they don’t hurt anyone, without having to fear the morality police. The point of modorators should be to create a welcoming and safe space, not to impose your morality on others.
Doesn’t matter if you think it’s “nice” or not. It’s a rule for this community.
You should answer the question posed though…
Yes, and you could have answered “thanks for your input, but we are going to stick with our rules because we have our reasons”, instead you basically tell me “Doesn’t matter what you think, these are the rules and you must respect them. No discussion allowed”. I mean sure, you make the rules, but the way you enforce them and react to criticism speaks for itself.
I don’t make the rules here, but I do enforce them.
Out of curiosity who does make the rules? You’re a moderator right? Doesn’t that mean you make the rules or at least contribute to them?
Right, “you were just doing your job” …
Looking at this comment section, you are clearly NOT enforcing them.
Is it a bannable offense or not?
“nanana boo boo”
No, no, you don’t get it. It’s not about being nice, it’s about telegraphing what a good, nonthreatening supplicant you are
I already said he was an asshole and cited the reason, that’s not supplication.
You don’t have to celebrate death to prove you aren’t a supplicant. 😉
You wrote the words “basic humanity” as if that was supposed to make sense as a justification for a rule. Don’t think we’ve seen a reason.
Reason enough for people with basic human empathy.
I have empathy for the people whose lives were made miserable by republican policies graham championed and I celebrate one less champion of those policies fucking people over
I said almost the exact same thing.
Jesus fucking Christ. We’re really doing this high road virtue signaling bullshit here, too? Cool. Continue being part of the problem, I guess.
If you don’t like it, make your own community. It’s a stated rule here.
Is there a rule about talking about disliking it? I don’t see one in writing, but it seems like it wouldn’t matter.
Nope, no rule against it so long as you continue being civil about it. Shading over into personal attacks would break rule 3.
Some communities have a rule against meta commentary, which this would fall under, but we don’t have that rule here.
Which is weird because [email protected] DOES have that rule and both were set up by the same person. (Rule #6 in World)
Cool, well, if it’s a real rule and not total nonsense you should probably get to work banning every single person in this comment section who is doing the thing you’re telling me isn’t allowed. Otherwise, I don’t know, it might be seen as obviously a bullshit rule used to selectively stop specific discussions.
What the hell is “meta commentary”?
Ok agreed. No surprise night raping or murdering people in colonial genocide projects that Graham Cracker. I hope we’ll all live to celebrate that fucker dying some day too.
Now on the celebrations.