[-] TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org 8 points 22 hours ago

If I recall correctly, the main reason we defederated from those instances at the time was the sheer volume of spam we were getting from users of those instances. While we do sometimes have a need to moderate users from larger instances like Lemm.ee, it's not currently at a volume that we can't handle, from what I've seen.

As always, as a moderator of several Beehaw communities, I would encourage you to report any comment or post you see that isn't up to the standards of Beehaw.org. Don't assume someone else is going to do it, and don't assume that moderators are always watching every interactions closely - we're all doing this in our free time and have other responsibilities. We may not take action on every report - sometimes things are borderline or the community has already pushed back and we feel like things are in hand - but I guarantee someone is looking at and considering every one.

[-] TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org 2 points 2 days ago

It was very early on, the first week or so after it released. I'm sure they've fixed a lot of the bugs but honestly I just haven't really been motivated to try it out again.

[-] TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org 16 points 2 days ago

I tried to play London and it crashed constantly. Now, that's not all that different an experience from playing any Bethesda game, but it did kind of kill any interest I had in the mod.

[-] TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org 79 points 1 month ago

I saw this headline and expected something very different than what I got, and I'm really glad. I think the last decade has made me really cynical about technology and the internet, for some good reasons, to the point where a story like this is almost surprising. I found myself a little caught off guard by how emotional I got while reading it. Thank you for posting this.

74

Hey Beeple and visitors to Beehaw: I think we need to have a discussion about !technology@beehaw.org, community culture, and moderation. First, some of the reasons that I think we need to have this conversation.

  1. Technology got big fast and has stayed Beehaw's most active community.
  2. Technology gets more reports (about double in the last month by a rough hand count) than the next highest community that I moderate (Politics, and this is during election season in a month that involved a disastrous debate, an assassination attempt on a candidate, and a major party's presumptive nominee dropping out of the race)
  3. For a long time, I and other mods have felt that Technology at times isn’t living up to the Beehaw ethos. More often than I like I see comments in this community where users are being abusive or insulting toward one another, often without any provocation other than the perception that the other user’s opinion is wrong.

Because of these reasons, we have decided that we may need to be a little more hands-on with our moderation of Technology. Here’s what that might mean:

  1. Mods will be more actively removing comments that are unkind or abusive, that involve personal attacks, or that just have really bad vibes.
    a. We will always try to be fair, but you may not always agree with our moderation decisions. Please try to respect those decisions anyway. We will generally try to moderate in a way that is a) proportional, and b) gradual.
    b. We are more likely to respond to particularly bad behavior from off-instance users with pre-emptive bans. This is not because off-instance users are worse, or less valuable, but simply that we aren't able to vet users from other instances and don't interact with them with the same frequency, and other instances may have less strict sign-up policies than Beehaw, making it more difficult to play whack-a-mole.
  2. We will need you to report early and often. The drawbacks of getting reports for something that doesn't require our intervention are outweighed by the benefits of us being able to get to a situation before it spirals out of control. By all means, if you’re not sure if something has risen to the level of violating our rule, say so in the report reason, but I'd personally rather get reports early than late, when a thread has spiraled into an all out flamewar.
    a. That said, please don't report people for being wrong, unless they are doing so in a way that is actually dangerous to others. It would be better for you to kindly disagree with them in a nice comment.
    b. Please, feel free to try and de-escalate arguments and remind one another of the humanity of the people behind the usernames. Remember to Be(e) Nice even when disagreeing with one another. Yes, even Windows users.
  3. We will try to be more proactive in stepping in when arguments are happening and trying to remind folks to Be(e) Nice.
    a. This isn't always possible. Mods are all volunteers with jobs and lives, and things often get out of hand before we are aware of the problem due to the size of the community and mod team.
    b. This isn't always helpful, but we try to make these kinds of gentle reminders our first resort when we get to things early enough. It’s also usually useful in gauging whether someone is a good fit for Beehaw. If someone responds with abuse to a gentle nudge about their behavior, it’s generally a good indication that they either aren’t aware of or don’t care about the type of community we are trying to maintain.

I know our philosophy posts can be long and sometimes a little meandering (personally that's why I love them) but do take the time to read them if you haven't. If you can't/won't or just need a reminder, though, I'll try to distill the parts that I think are most salient to this particular post:

  1. Be(e) nice. By nice, we don't mean merely being polite, or in the surface-level "oh bless your heart" kind of way; we mean be kind.
  2. Remember the human. The users that you interact with on Beehaw (and most likely other parts of the internet) are people, and people should be treated kindly and in good-faith whenever possible.
  3. Assume good faith. Whenever possible, and until demonstrated otherwise, assume that users don't have a secret, evil agenda. If you think they might be saying or implying something you think is bad, ask them to clarify (kindly) and give them a chance to explain. Most likely, they've communicated themselves poorly, or you've misunderstood. After all of that, it's possible that you may disagree with them still, but we can disagree about Technology and still give one another the respect due to other humans.
98
144
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org to c/politics@beehaw.org

I've seen a lot of ink spilled recently over the Harris campaign's recent adoption of the tactic of calling Trump and his cronies "weird". There's a lot of hand-wringing over the Democrats ceding the high ground or being unserious about serious matters, but this article, and especially the source material it links to by Sdrja Popovic (a non-violent Serbian revolutionary during the Milošević regime) about the power of humor in non-violent movements, really changed my thinking on this.

[-] TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org 47 points 3 months ago

We've removed some of the comments in this thread for expressing the exact racist sentiments which would warrant this type of post and for arguing in bad faith. This is a perfectly salient conversation to be having in this community so we will be leaving this thread up, but as a reminder, please engage in good faith and be nice. If you don't want to have conversations about anti-racism in Technology then I suggest you unsubscribe from this community and others on Beehaw.

On a personal note: I would be absolutely thrilled to see more, better discussions of the intersections of areas like race, gender, and sexuality with technology, and fewer arguments about which Linux distro is better.

[-] TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org 102 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Hey Folks, Technology Mod here. We're aware of the reports that this post has gathered. I recognize that this is probably fake and that the source is suspect.

While we don't have any source requirements in the sidebar for this community, in general better sources would be preferred. However, the post has generated enough discussion that I hesitate to remove it. Unfortunately, Lemmy doesn't provide many tools for us to deal with situations like this, such as pinning comments, editing titles, or adding flair. For now, I'll be leaving the post up, but I'll continue to watch the discussion to see if other actions might need to be taken.

Thanks for your patience, folks.

4
submitted 4 months ago by TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org to c/music@beehaw.org

This album dropped a few weeks ago and I've been listening on repeat. It's a weird mix of genres but every song is a banger IMO.

There are some slightly annoying - if brief - ads for the artist's merch store between each song, so if you'd prefer an uninterrupted listening experience you can find the album on Spotify or other streaming platforms, I assume.

15
The New Propaganda War (www.theatlantic.com)

Autocrats in China, Russia, and elsewhere are now making common cause with MAGA Republicans to discredit liberalism and freedom around the world.

8
submitted 6 months ago by TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org to c/music@beehaw.org

The new Knocked Loose album dropped today.

8
submitted 7 months ago by TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org to c/music@beehaw.org
99
submitted 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org to c/politics@beehaw.org

Hey folks. I just want to check in with the community about a post that was recently removed. My intention is absolutely not to create drama or stir anything up, but I'd like to make sure you all understand my reasoning for removing the post. Also, I'm aware that I'm not as good at articulating these kinds of things as some of our folks, so don't expect a classic Beehaw philosophy post here.

The post in questions was a link to a twitter thread providing evidence of the IRL identity of "comic" "artist" stonetoss, who is unquestionably a huge piece of shit and a neo-nazi, or at least something so indistinguishable from one that the difference is meaningless.

The post provoked some discussion in the Mod chat and several of us, myself included, were on the fence about it. I understand that there are arguments both for and against naming and calling out people like stonetoss. I find arguments in both directions somewhat convincing, but ultimately the thing that a number of us expressed was that the act of calling someone like this out and potentially exposing them to harassment or real-world consequences for their views might be morally defensible, it didn't feel like Beehaw was the right place for it. We really want Beehaw to be a place that is constructive and kind, and that this type of doxxing/callout didn't seem to fit our vision what what we want Beehaw to be. At the same time, we're all very conscious that it would be easy for this kind of thinking to lead to tone policing and respectability politics, and that is also something we want to be careful to avoid. All this to say that I made what I think was the best decision in the moment for the overall health of !politics as a community, as I saw it.

On a personal note, I find that our Politics community is one of the communities that is most prone to falling into some of the traps that Beehaw was created to avoid. That's very understandable - politics are something that cause real and immediate harm and stress in a lot of folks' lives; they're complicated, contentious, and often make us feel powerless. I'd like to remind folks as we move into the general election season in the US, though, to remember the founding principles of Beehaw when discussing these topics, no matter how stressful they may be: remember the human, assume good faith in others, and above all, be(e) nice.

Thanks,

TheRtRevKaiser

[-] TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org 31 points 8 months ago

To quote Julia Serrano's excellent writeup on GAC for adolescents:

The “experimental” label is most regularly levied against puberty blockers, probably because the average person isn’t familiar with them. However, they’ve been used to treat precocious puberty since the 1980s (Comite et al., 1981; Mancuso et al., 1989) and to stave off unwanted endogenous puberties in trans youth since the mid-to-late-1990s (Cohen-Kettenis & van Goozen, 1998; van der Loos et al., 2023). For anyone interested in learning more about them, I’d recommend Giordano & Holm’s 2020 accessibly written scientific review “Is puberty delaying treatment ‘experimental treatment’?” as it answers the most commonly asked questions about the method, its efficacy, potential side effects, and so on.

Giordano & Holm’s review also addresses another common claim levied against gender-affirming care, namely, that there aren’t any “high quality studies.” In actuality, there are many high-quality studies: sound methodologies, significant sample sizes, published in well-respected journals, etcetera. When trans-skeptical people argue this, what they really mean is that there aren’t any randomized controlled studies — where neither the doctor nor patient know whether they’ve received the medicine in question or whether they’ve received a placebo. While this certainly is the “gold standard” for medical trials, it is not logistically possible in cases such as this, as both doctors and patients would quickly surmise which group they were assigned to based upon the changes (or lack thereof) in their bodies. The review also delves into ethical issues regarding withholding this treatment that make controlled studies impossible.

The second paragraph delves into the claim that there are no quality studies on the effects of delayed puberty. We actually have a good number of high quality studies, what we don't have are double blind, randomized controlled studies because of the practical and ethical difficulties of doing so. This, of course, gets twisted into labeling puberty blockers as having no evidence or for being "experimental".

[-] TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org 28 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

There have been some questions about the quality of the source posted in this topic - Mediabiasfactcheck.com has them at a "Poor" factual reporting level. There are, however, a few more reliable sources reporting on this, such as this article in the New Republic

[-] TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org 31 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Hi skeptomatic, Beehaw Technology mod here. To be clear, this community is not only for the uncritical admiration technological development or the tech sector. It is a community for discussion of Technology in general, which will likely include discussion of the effects of technology on society. Those topics very well may include discussions of how and when those technologies, the environment they are developed in, or the systems they enable are harmful to human flourishing.

You are absolutely welcome to defend generative AI as a useful or positive development - I personally think it's a really interesting technology with some major potential (although I think we're probably in a hype cycle and it's being applied in all kinds of ways that don't really make sense), but I also recognize that there are potential social pitfalls in it's development and deployment. Those ideas are worth discussing in a kind, civil manner.

Lastly, when you comment here on Beehaw, please remember our rule: Be(e) Nice.

[-] TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org 39 points 10 months ago

Honestly it's kind of hard to know how to respond to this.

We recognize that "I was just joking" isn't a universal defense, otherwise people wouldn't have had an issue with minstrel shows. But as a society we've come to recognize that humor can be persuasive and can inform people's beliefs about what others are like. It's similar to how sites like 4chan that started out with cultures that were drenched in ironic racism eventually were just actually racist.

16
submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org to c/tabletop@beehaw.org

Mirror, in case you hit a paywall: https://archive.is/iCYt4

112
[-] TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org 38 points 1 year ago

I'm sorry if it's frustrating to you to have megathreads like this. I'm not enthused about the extra effort in redirecting posts to the Megathread, either, but I'm not aware of a better way to handle topics that are flooding a community other than gathering them up in a thread like this. It annoys users (and mods) when dozens of articles about the same topic are dominating a community, so we'd like to do something to alleviate that when possible. I've seen similar concepts used in a number of different places (old-school forums, reddit alternatives like Tildes) because, as far as I've seen, there's not a better alternative for wrangling topics that might otherwise clutter the feed.

If you have any ideas about better ways to handle this type of thing in the future, I'd love to hear them (and I genuinely mean that - I think we're open to suggestions if a better way exists).

452

Hey folks -

The seemingly never-ending flood of Musk/Twitter news and commentary is getting to some of our users (and some of the mods, too), so we've decided to create a general Megathread for all things related to Elon Musk and X/Twitter.

This thread will be a general Musk catch-all, so we're including news about Musk acting the fool as related to any of his companies (SpaceX, Tesla, Boring). News about those companies that don't involve Elon can be posted outside this thread.

[-] TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org 36 points 1 year ago

Do these people have any dignity?

Hey, I don't know if you mean it that way but this is a pretty unkind thing to say. I suspect that a lot of these mods are folks that have spent a good bit of time and effort trying to build up communities that they care about.

You may think that the platform that they've chosen to do that on is working against them (and I agree), but I don't think that what they are feeling is contemptible in any way.

2

I'm honestly not sure how to summarize this video. It's a very interesting look at the way that the impulse to "optimize" gameplay affects the culture surrounding games, especially MMOs and other multiplayer games. It particularly looks at World of Warcraft and the social norms that have developed around and within the game. It's a long watch but I found it really interesting, and I have zero connection to WoW and have never played it.

view more: next ›

TheRtRevKaiser

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF