148
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 24 Sep 2025
148 points (98.7% liked)
Ye Power Trippin' Bastards
1443 readers
770 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Thank you so much for the well wishes.
For me, this really is the best path forward. Writing takes a lot of effort, and I like having full ownership of the stack where my work lives. Part of that ownership also means deciding how I want to interact with others—including having the option to de-federate if needed.
I know my approach to community management is a little different from most here. Even though I was on Reddit for 18 years, I’ve always felt somewhat anti-Reddit. My focus isn’t really on freedom of speech so much as freedom of association.
That’s why I don’t believe every community has to—or should—be open to everyone. Some people are a natural fit, and some are not—and I tend to be more careful about where I draw that line.
Hope it goes well bro
Was that necessary?
Edit: for context: https://lemmy.world/post/36281965
Socialising, interacting, expressing ourselves? Is this place a medical journal or a research paper? Is any of this necessary? We could remove 99% of the posts as they're not necessary. None of this stuff we're doing here is necessary for our lives. (actually might be a detriment). Are you necessary? Am I necessary? The world would still rotate. What kind of philosophical nightmare are you trying to uncover?
Everybody in this thread is aware AtomicPoet doesn't like being called 'bro', that's the reason of the whole debacle.
He has stepped down from his mod position, which is a better outcome than 99% of the posts in this community.
Then people still come at him with this kind of comments.
IIRC, AtomicPoet has autism, the comment above is the equivalent of bullying the autist kid who struggled to understand social norms at school.
Yes, but maybe the other people don't like being told that they're toxic for using a colloquialism. Why does this kind of stuff only ever go one direction? Why can't someone sit down and lecture atomicpoet at length about how wrong he is for his failure to get with the program of how other people want him to interact, instead of the other way around, and then ban him if he doesn't agree to keep all their communities completely free-form where people can express whatever they want, and ban anyone who upvotes or defends his viewpoint if anyone does?
I've got no slightest bit of ill will for the guy. His viewpoint makes sense, it's fine, and also I spent some time trying to really break it down why this approach might be a bad idea, but at the end of the day I wish him well and he's obviously welcome to set up his stuff and his communities in the way that will spark joy. It's all good. I do feel like a lot of times this "I have decided the metric for virtue and you must obey it" doesn't really go along with being willing to accede to other people's metrics of virtue when they decide to enforce that you obey it in turn. (That is why I keep joking about YPTB banning people who take the viewpoint that anything the mods do is okay because they're the mods and they've got the power within their community.)
You're joking, right? If it only went one direction then none of the posts calling them out for anything would've happened in the first place.
You can still criticize someone's beliefs while respecting them by refusing to refer to them by terms they don't want. Case in point, this comment: https://quokk.au/comment/1473591
Well, but my point is that these people whose logic is "I own this community, and so therefore I own the people within it, so whatever I think they should be allowed and not is the word of God, QED," I feel like those people wouldn't be amenable to the same logic if it were themselves in the peon position and some other person in the "word of God" position. Like if they were banned for voting the wrong way on comments within YPTB, it all of a sudden wouldn't be a totally logical and understandable thing to have happen.
The fact that YPTB doesn't work that way, and we can just kind of talk things out here (most of the time), doesn't really change that. They're still defending a system where people who think differently cannot criticize them (at least not in a direct reply in the same domain).
Exsctly, you're describing a power trip, see the name of the sub. Why is the OP who posted this in this sub then acting surprised? Lol
I'm literally not talking about any of that, I'm just saying it's childish that people are intentionally going out of their way to bully someone by calling them bro when they asked people not to. That's it. That's all I had a problem with.
Why is banning someone for voting in a way you don't like, and calling them "toxic," not bullying?
That's it. That's what I had a problem with. A lot of cultures recognize the right to self-defense, and it applies rhetorically as well as physically. And just like in the physical realm, sometimes people recognize the response as extreme when they don't see their initial provocation as "extreme" in the same way, because the people they were attacking were bad people, and so basically they deserved what they got, unlike me who didn't even do anything wrong.
I never said that wasn't bullying.
Counter-bullying isn't really bullying, though. That's some "American high school with a zero tolerance policy for violence" shit.
Call them a clown. Call them as asshole. Call them a power tripping bastard. Call them an idiot. Tell them "I don't need to call you bro to diminish your statements, you never said anything of value." There's countless ways you can criticize and even insult them without saying bro.
I can't speak for anyone else, but to me, I am practicing the subtle art of being disobedient without being hostile or unfriendly. Starting to get all mad about it would not be the point, I think I told OOP that directly that I didn't really agree with people who were getting super-hostile about it back at him either.
It's like when your sibling announces that you're not allowed to say "pancakes," you have to say "flapjacks" from now on. Guess what's going to get discussed at every breakfast using what word for a while going forward? They might get bent out of shape about it, but if so they kind of did it to themselves, and maybe getting bent out of shape is how they learn that that's not what's up and that's not the way the relationship between us works.
IDK man. I've tried any number of ways to explain this. You're not required to see it the same way as me, but pick any one of those explanations, they are different facets or ways of looking at how I look at it. I tried a few different ways. If you're not into it, I get it, but you're not going to have a lot of luck just repeating the other way until eventually you "win" or w/e.
To me it's just really really close to intentionally misgendering a person after someone stops liking them. This isn't a gender related topic though, as far as I know, so I'm not saying people are misgendering (I'd feel a lot more strongly and I think others would as well). But because it's so close to that it probably just triggers some of the same response in me.
For what it's worth, if they said something like "don't call me an asshole, I don't like that word" after someone criticized them my opinion would be different, because the original request to not be called bro was reasonable (if odd, and obviously threatening to ban people downvoting it was out of line). But being upset people are rightfully criticizing you is very different.
Man, get the fuck out of here. No it isn't, you're just grasping around for various trigger-word framings where one side of the argument has a built in "win" button.
Yes, precisely. Not liking people using the word "bro" and explaining why is fine. Banning people from using it in your community and explaining why is weird, but sure. Seeking to artificially prevent people from "promoting" it by disagreeing with you by voting on comments, and sending out snotty messages demanding that they stop voting on content in a way that you don't like, is some wild bullshit that's going to lead to people making fun of you. That's just how it works. You could wish it was otherwise, although to me it is a fine form of self expression self defense as I already explained, but it is not otherwise, that it how it is.
I feel like you just skipped over this part.
Umm, no, they aren't. Maybe they are now, after you made the comment I'm currently replying to, but I read your earlier comment and had to go back and double-check Hansae's comment hadn't been edited, because your response made no sense otherwise.
Maybe I should have added a link to the previous post in the OP of this one.
The events were happening in the span of a few days, I assumed most of the people would know of the context
Haha, nope. This is the very first post on the subject I've seen.
And now I'm just really confused about how someone could be offended by the term "bro". Personally I'd say it's gender-neutral, but I can understand a woman, especially a trans woman, being opposed to the term. But that doesn't seem to be what's going on here. So it's just...weird. It's a friendly term of endearment.
I edited both the OP and the comment, so hopefully it's more clear.
The reasoning behind it is that 'bro' can be related to the 'bro' culture (think cryptobros), that is not known for good discussions but rather dismissive comments and attitudes.
There is a more detailed explanation somewhere down the comments, but too lazy to find it now.
I don't really agree with that stance, but I can see why someone would think that.
Edit: found this https://atomicpoet.org/@atomicpoet/posts/AyXynXKOmOfyjE7Wb2
Yeah I had already seen that, but it was so nonsensical I was hoping for something a bit more solid.
I appreciate you finding the longer source. Not sure why you're getting downvoted for sharing it...talk about shooting the messenger. I'll respond to it here, since I can't reply directly to @atomicpoet@atomicpoet.org's post on Mangane.
No offence to Chris, but their take here is utterly deluded. I'll avoid using "bro" with them (not that it's a particularly common part of my vocabulary, to my knowledge) out of kindness, but the reason they want it avoided is just insane. Suggesting that a friendly "hey bro" has anything to do with the toxic "bro culture" they describe is like suggesting Java has anything to do with JavaScript. Or cars are related to carpets.
Calling someone "bro" is no different to "mate". With the wrong tone or context, it can be passive aggressive, but by default it is jovial and good-natured.
Chris seems to have serious problems understanding context, and seems to be completely ignoring one of the first rules of online social interaction (and, to be honest, all social interaction): assume good intentions. They're looking for something to be angry about. And so they find it.
I’ve never once heard “bro” used in a genuinely positive way. Not once.
At best it’s fake-jovial. At worst it’s a way to diminish, antagonize, or mask hostility.
Case in point: this very thread. People kept saying “bro” not out of warmth, but because they thought it would piss me off. That’s not camaraderie—that’s toxicity.
And no, “bro” is not the same as “mate.” “Mate” might be regional slang. “Bro” is gendered. Which means it’s exclusionary by default. It assumes something about the person you’re talking to that may not be true. That’s not inclusion. That’s presumption.
So unless someone is your literal brother, why keep it around? If a word carries a whole lot of negatives and almost no positives, why pretend it’s harmless? Better yet—why does your urge to use a toxic word override my goal of building an inclusive community? Would you defend other toxic words the same way—words with even sharper malice baked in?
And if you would, then maybe the problem isn’t me banning “bro.” Maybe the problem is what you’re really defending.
Ok now it makes sense why you'd ask a random guy "is that necessary"
(how come it got to this corner of the Internet everything is exhausting over here.)
Let me get this, so there's this guy who was trying to mod multiple subreddits(or wtvr) but he has an illness/disease that is commonly known to interfere with the social dynamics?
I've never read an username and never will but I'm taking a break from y'all
Was it necessary to intentionally call someone bro just to poke the bear? Yes, it's weird that they don't like the term, yeah, but people intentionally going out of their way to call them bro is literally bullying. Yes, it's bad that they threatened to ban people for downvoting their comments, but it doesn't make bullying okay. If people want to fling valid criticism their way, that's fine, but just calling someone bro when they said they don't like it is pretty childish.
Take this comment, it is pretty clear, but doesn't call them a name they specifically asked to not be called. https://quokk.au/comment/1473591
I would agree, but also I would say harassing people based on their voting, and threatening them, is bullying. As the saying goes, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If they don't want to be bullied, they shouldn't bully. I'm in favor of taking advantage of teachable moments to reduce abuse in the long term.
A friendly good luck wish? yeah it was :)
Good luck bro
That makes sense, good luck until then!