13
Can you be a contrarian to your own views?
(lemmy.kya.moe)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 Jan 2025
13 points (78.3% liked)
Casual Conversation
2526 readers
211 users here now
Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.
RULES (updated 01/22/25)
- Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
- Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won't be punished for trying.
- Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There's a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it's vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a "controversial" message for it to be allowed.
- Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
- No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a "spammy" message must be applicable to four purple answers before it's allowed.
- Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it "would be a copyright violation if the info was art" as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar's Number) or less, it's considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.
Casual conversation communities:
Related discussion-focused communities
- !actual_discussion@lemmy.ca
- !askmenover30@lemm.ee
- !dads@feddit.uk
- !letstalkaboutgames@feddit.uk
- !movies@lemm.ee
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Now that is the case, I totally agree.
3 months ago, things were very different. Also, I am talking specifically on .world. That's the instance where most of my drama came from
And for the record, there are lots of people leaving .world for that very reason now. It's become a very toxic pro-censorship instance and people are leaving.
My post/comment history is public, as are the modlogs. If you're bored enough, feel free to look at my comments and the replies I'd get. You'll see for yourself it's because people thought my advocating for third party was treason: https://lemmy.world/u/UniversalMonk
What are your theories for the "hatred"? If you find any samples of posts/commetns that are offensive, please post them.
Because honestly I haven't gotten much drama since the election, because to your point, lots of people are pro third-party now. Most of the people who continue to organize for my ban always bring up the .world drama from 3 months ago before the election, and they are usually from there.
.world Biden/Harris supporters have a very long memory and hold grudges! lolol
Also, I haven't been banned from any instances since the election. Yet I haven't changed my stance or attitude at all. So I think that's pretty telling.
Thanks, friend!