184
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 30 Jul 2025
184 points (93.4% liked)
Ye Power Trippin' Bastards
749 readers
50 users here now
This is a community in the spirit of "Am I The Asshole" where people can post their own bans from lemmy or reddit or whatever and get some feedback from others whether the ban was justified or not.
Sometimes one just wants to be able to challenge the arguments some mod made and this could be the place for that.
Posting Guidelines
All posts should follow this basic structure:
- Which mods/admins were being Power Tripping Bastards?
- What sanction did they impose (e.g. community ban, instance ban, removed comment)?
- Provide a screenshot of the relevant modlog entry (don’t de-obfuscate mod names).
- Provide a screenshot and explanation of the cause of the sanction (e.g. the post/comment that was removed, or got you banned).
- Explain why you think its unfair and how you would like the situation to be remedied.
Rules
- Post only about bans or other sanctions that you have received from a mod or admin.
- Don’t use private communications to prove your point. We can’t verify them and they can be faked easily.
- Don’t deobfuscate mod names from the modlog with admin powers.
- Don’t harass mods or brigade comms. Don’t word your posts in a way that would trigger such harassment and brigades.
- Do not downvote posts if you think they deserved it. Use the comment votes (see below) for that.
- You can post about power trippin’ in any social media, not just lemmy. Feel free to post about reddit or a forum etc.
- If you are the accused PTB, while you are welcome to respond, please do so within the relevant post.
Expect to receive feedback about your posts, they might even be negative.
Make sure you follow this instance's code of conduct. In other words we won't allow bellyaching about being sanctioned for hate speech or bigotry.
YTPB matrix channel: For real-time discussions about bastards or to appeal mod actions in YPTB itself.
Some acronyms you might see.
- PTB - Power-Tripping Bastard: The commenter agrees with you this was a PTB mod.
- YDI - You Deserved It: The commenter thinks you deserved that mod action.
- YDM new - You Deserved More: The commenter thinks you got off too lightly.
- BPR - Bait-Provoked Reaction: That mod probably overreacted in charged situation, or due to being baited.
- CLM - Clueless Mod: The mod probably just doesn't understand how their software works.
Relevant comms
founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
Didn't piefed came with built-in echo chamber features, hiding downvoted comments by default and marking people who get downvotes with special marks?
I think in that scenario bans because downvoting patterns would be far more aggressive
Yes, and maybe, plus no.
When individual users have more tools to work with, the mods don't have to be as authoritarian. e.g. if a bunch of people complain to a mod of a European community that there are too many posts mentioning Donald Trump and Elon Musk, then with PieFed the individual users can use the keyword filtering tools to tailor their personal view of the shared community content to accomplish that end (best of all there, the options include not only All and None but to filter Some of the content).
Another example is that by labeling highly contentious users, e.g. those who receive >10x more downvotes than upvotes, the users themselves can make the choice as to whether to engage or simply keep scrolling, i.e. providing additional options beyond simply block vs. allow. People that would otherwise be blocked will likely have their content be more exposed rather than less using this tool - or at least that's one possiblity, which Lemmy did not allow or provide for (offering only Block vs. not, with nothing whatsoever in-between).
Still another example are people who post 10x more often than comment - a potential unregistered bot account, where I guess commenting on their posts could be a waste of time if many people block that account and thus a reply on those posts is unlikely to ever be seen by an actual human?
And still another example is new accounts, less than a couple weeks old, so that your reply may be different to them than an established user.
Yes PieFed can also automatically collapse or hide content based on downvotes received. I have these features turned off but if someone wants them on, then such a person might be better off to use them, rather than feel tempted to downvote or comment on such controversial content? (Edit: imagine a world where instead of comments like "this take is disgusting, you should be ashamed of yourself for not thinking precisely as I personally do myself!", those who don't want to see such things do not have to, while those that do can have a genuine back-and-forth discussion without such noise. Good fences make good neighbors? This seems the polar opposite of an echo chamber where everyone simply MUST view the same content in one of the same identical manner of options provided, because those are the only options that the developers have deigned to allow for.)
A CRUCIAL difference here is that all of these features above are implemented at the level of individual users, making their own personal choices about what they want to see or not see. Lemmy mainly provides features to instance admins and community mods, but by shifting the choices downwards to the user level, it's a whole new era in content management, having democratized the process, or at least allowing more for that, rather than leaving all the capabilities - along with all the responsibilities - in the hands of the authority figures higher up in the hierarchy?
I will leave it as an exercise to prove whether putting power into the hands of the people rather than concentrating it into the hands of a few is "good" or not (my personal opinion is that it's great!), but objectively PieFed seems to offer far more "freedom" to end-users than Lemmy, as I understand it. (Edit: I guess I am saying that if Lemmy is akin to Windows where Big Daddy is always right, not only but especially when he is wrong:-P, because that is simply the only option made available to people - to either stay or go, fully block or fully allow, nothing in-between is provided for - then PieFed is Linux leaving it up to the user to decide individually what is right for them, by tailoring their customization options to suit their desires. Yes that theoretically could lead to an echo chamber where everyone must use a wide variety of flavors of Linux, in which case yes some could make the "wrong" choice - although I would argue there, why is it wrong if that is what they desire? - but don't forget that the alternative is somehow even more of an echo chamber where everyone must use Windows, so I for one don't see the addition of these new features as a bad thing? I suppose time will tell.)
It's not about who have the power. There are still mods on piefed with all the same power as lemmy mods.
But with the downvoting penalty people get an opportunity to banish people they do not agree with to the shadow realm in a way that's not possible in Lemmy. It's not the power of the people it's the power of a furious mob against anyone out of the mob.
You say "hideous user" I say any user who disagrees on the slightest with the mob ideas. And as the echo chamber closes smaller and smaller divergences will get punished until people will literally just be an echo of the allowed discourse.
I do think those piefed feature are a great mistake. People still have all the power via blocking users or instances here. But the "extra power" to the people is not really that, is just a net of authoritarianism in disguise. Heavy punishments to anyone disagreeing with authority, it doesn't matter that much if authority comes from a King, an aristocracy or a Soviet (assembly of people) it's still authoritarianism. And that's what I think will happen with any piefed instance that enables these features.
We all know that no only "hideous users" get downvoted, and that "hideous users" not always get downvoted. We all know that even the platform says to not use the downvote as a "I disagree button" people use it for this.
I'm more on the opposite side of the spectrum on this matter. And more and more I think it's better to completely get rid of the downvote button. If you really don't like something block it for you, there's no need for people to have tools that greatly affect other people. For instance if you downvoted some comment of a third user and that comment gets hidden. I may like that comment but now I don't see it because you were given a tool that gives you power over me. A tool like that is great for majorities to oppress minorities. As part of several minorities I've always been wary of those.
Yep! I wish all Lemmy instances would get rid of the downvote button. So many drive-by serial downvoters would have to find a different hobby.
wrong
How so? Are you defending serial downvoters?
no, just that they would comment negativity instead
Nah, the types of people who do that don't have the balls to comment. For them, the dopamine rush comes from pushing a button and moving on. They love that it doesn't take any time for them to try to affect the conversation.
See, they don't wanna be hard, the just don't want YOU to be heard if they disagree with you.
I prefer negative comments to serial downvoters. Serial downvoters are cowards.