This is horrific, I was unfairly instance banned for X. Now I won't be able to see all their amazing content about Y and Z.

1. The Power Trippin Bastard was: @Illecors@lemmy.cafe
2. Instance Ban
3. 
4. ??? without a reason I am left to assume the admin is possibly a neo-nazi? — I don't know, it's hard to tell and I have nothing to go on for this.
5. It infringes on my basic human rights, specifically Article 27 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights ("Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits."), I would like public flagellation of the administrator as a remedy.

Comment and thread in question: https://lemmy.world/comment/23138585

Ban from that community, memes@lemmy.ml:

Rule 1 of said community: Be civil and nice.

Rule 1 of said instance: No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia. Code of Conduct.

I was clearly not bigoted in any manner, and I believe more civil than the way I was treated, was it the Code of Conduct? Excerpts:

Please be kind and courteous. There’s no need to be mean or rude.

Respect that people have differences of opinion and that every design or implementation choice carries a trade-off and numerous costs. There is seldom a right answer.

I think I was kind with the people I disagreed with, even if they could not be in return, yet those comments (some including ableist slurs) remain. I think this is enough to demonstrate it is merely a difference in ideology which motivated the ban. Well, bans, because it seems they copied and pasted the same ban in all the communities they have access to:

It's not a general lemmy.ml ban, just those in particular.

I understand this kind of behavior in safe space communities that don't want outsiders bellyaching about the pragmatism of electoral politics, but that's not the case in any of the communities I've been banned from, nor is it a part of the instance rules or CoC.

PTB or triggered shitlib? Not an exclusive or, of course.

in which PugJesus makes a post about 'solidarity' and immediately bans any anarchist he disagrees with.

I get that tankiejerk is a circlejerk comm, but the hypocracy in this post was so rank I couldn't resist commenting. Obviously I was perm banned within minutes

PJ says:

but when someone says to you “I’m an anarchist, I organize to alleviate suffering at the grassroots level”, the correct response is “Right on, comrade”, even if you think state institutions are the optimal solution.

Me:

I’m an anarchist, I organize locally. It’s a big part of my daily life. based on my experiences I have found way more common cause with so-called ‘tankies’ than liberals when it comes to actually working to oppose the shit that’s crushing us.

[banned]

it turns out that he doesn't practice what he preaches at all. Obligatory:

There's only one mod of !mop@quokk.au

I commented on their meme about Kamala Harris being just as likely to commit war crimes as Trump with an admittedly snarky, sarcastic reply that basically said "some of us wanted to whatever we could, as little as it might be, instead of watching the world burn. Must feel real morally superior safe behind that keyboard"

They banned me from the community for it.

Kinda funny for a community that bills itself as "free from the influence of .ml"

modlog: https://lemmy.ml/modlog/19692

by courtesy of @KindnessInfinity@lemmy.ml

Apparently I was instance banned for a single downvote on a ~~comment~~ post I disagreed with. I've said before that mods who do this kinda thing are cowards, but I'm honestly not hugely upset about it as I'm not a furry, so whatever. But insulting me in the ban is too much. Grow a fucking spine you pussy, and at least message me if you're too going to insult me with your ban.

Edit: Changed comment to post, for clarity. I assumed it was a comment I downvoted as I tend to interact more in comments.

Edit 2: This got more traction than I expected and I'm glad to see most agree that moderating by voting behavior is childish. I don't condone the transphobia in the comments though. Don't judge people for how they view themselves, judge them for their actions, especially towards others.

Edit 3: Now apparently I'm inciting harassment by posting here. Go fuck yourself. I never even called you out by name.

The video I linked for reference

I guess I was "sympathizing with invaders" because I said "Such an absolute waste of life, just for the vanity of one man."

Just patently ridiculous moderation...

Post content:

Live image of Trump negotiations with Iran

I started feeling that Lemmy mods remove posts just to prove they are hard working.

https://lemmy.ml/modlog?page=1&actionType=All&userId=3184187

Time for a second holocaust

Man, why does Israel seem to want nothing more than to justify what Hitler did? Starting to feel like he should have been given time to finish the job.

I don't know how anyone with a clear mind could possibly defend this kind of behavior, this is Nazi shit. You cannot claim to be "apolitical", ban both sides and then still have a Hitler defender around on your instance.

I don't care if I am banned or not even though I did not do anything wrong - I mostly lurk on here, but Agrivar@lemmy.world should not be welcome in the fediverse, and the fact that they are only banned from 1 community is completely fucking inexcusable. kill all Nazis

I've made 3 posts to that community, none of which were in that span of time. So it had to be due to my accounts posting history. For the clarification, I open a window with all of the tabs of communities I am going to post to and add links/images and then titles. I then scroll down, ctrl tab, and hit submit. I'm not a bot. Which the mod could have just like... asked. But fine. He may not have the common decency to even ask a question before jumping to conclusions but i'll stop posting them so fast. Don't know which moderator it is but given that @Demigodrick@lemmy.zip is the only active moderator over there... fairly sure it was him.

Could just ask next time dude.

Edit: That's a lot of downvotes for not saying anything one way or another.

Edit 2: Ask questions? Get downvoted with no answers. Be polite? Get hostility for no reason. Wow.

This is becoming ridiculous.

We are back at square 1.

The power tripping admins at lemmy.blahaj.zone decided to ban me from 196 for zero reason. Citing "Troll" as the one they gave. I understand blahaj has had issues with power-tripping at the admin level in the past over stupid neopronoun debates regarding actual trolls pretending to be fake genders but this is a new low even for them.

This post from a defense news website that I have read many articles on that is fairly straight forward and technical in its descriptions of military topics was removed because Jordan Lund saw "Blog" in the title and didn't bother to read any farther?

https://sopuli.xyz/post/42317112

https://defence-blog.com/israeli-firm-signs-deal-to-test-black-eagle-50e-drone-in-u-s/

Our Mission

Our mission is simple: to inform with integrity, report with clarity, and represent the people and communities engaged in today’s most complex security environments. We believe in journalism that earns respect — through facts, fairness, and a deep understanding of the issues at stake.

We cover everything from emerging military technologies and global arms trade to strategic doctrines, battlefield developments, and geopolitical dynamics. Our reporting is built on verification, sourcing, and careful attention to detail. We do not chase virality—we pursue clarity.

We strive to ensure our readers—whether they are in government, the armed forces, academia, industry, or the public—are equipped with the information they need to understand today’s rapidly evolving security environment. Defence Blog – Authority & Citations

Quoted by international news agencies (Reuters, AP, BBC, CNN). Referenced by government institutions including the U.S. Army and Department of Defense. Trusted by leading global defense companies and policy think tanks. Regularly used as a source for expert commentary in media and research. Recognized as a reliable voice in global defense and security analysis.

https://defence-blog.com/

Overall, we rate Defence Blog as Least Biased due to its focus on factual military updates, pro-NATO alignment, and substantial coverage of Western defense activities, particularly support for Ukraine. We also rate it as Mostly Factual due to its consistent sourcing from military-related accounts and reliance on official announcements, however, the occasional lack of hyperlinks makes it difficult to verify information.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/defence-blog-bias-and-credibility/

Does this sound like a blog about frivolous opinions that would bring down the quality of posts on a politics community? Does this pass the smell test to you?

I would think this was just another mistake, but Jordan Lund has a pattern of behavior around this topic that I find extremely problematic, and I think it was one of the reasons he was removed as a mod at Lemmy.World.

https://lemmy.world/post/36621226

See this post where Jordan Lund removes a post from Dropsite News a highly regarded news source that is directly referenced by many mainstream news outlets and includes among other stalwart journalists, Ryan Grim.

https://lemmy.world/post/41068936

https://www.dropsitenews.com/about

https://www.unftr.com/blog/progressive-spotlight-ryan-grim

Grim’s talent is in identifying stories that are under-reported or contradict the supposed ideals of America. Among the many themes he interrogates is the United States’ public position on human rights and democracy. Grim’s recent reporting on the United States’ role in effectively toppling the democratically elected government of Imran Khan has been first class, and he often brings those questions to U.S. State Department press conferences, where his back-and-forth with official government spokespeople can be captured for all to witness.

And while there’s an ever-growing roster of progressive journalists performing great work—whether on war, civil liberties, or economics—Grim is the rare reporter on the left who the establishment respects. While some may view that as a shortcoming, Grim’s penchant for relationship building, combined with a tenacious desire to get to the truth, has served him—and the rest of us—well.

Also

https://sopuli.xyz/post/19888013

https://lemmy.world/post/36976275

https://lemmy.world/post/26943875

https://lemmy.world/post/27393569

https://lemmy.world/post/36493647

I am extremely disappointed to say the least from having such a worrying and bad experience on such a sensitive timely political topic right after I had a good experience with the overall Lemmy.World instance mods from my previous post.

sigh This is a problem.

edit How do I best escalate this to an instance admin issue at Lemmy.World?

Yeah I post a lot, but... I have no idea what I did?

I try to post a diverse range of interesting articles and take the time to quote relevant parts to contextualize my posts and I enjoy many Lemmy.World communities, what gives?

I can't find any messages explaining why or anything.

I can't even ask anyone there now can I right?

@threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works seems to be protecting the alleged pedophile, transphobe and pedophile president installed and protector.

In !spaceflight@sh.itjust.works’s sidebar, there are no rules listed, and what do you know, I get a comment remove and instant perma-ban.

When are these guys going to understand they are destroying the fediverse, causing all these alt account creations, and don’t understand the difference between when to downvote and when to use their mod powers.

I disagreed with a post Stamets made on their comm, and voiced an opposing opinion. I was never uncivil, but can't see my comments to share, as they've all been deleted.

So, apparently having an opinion other than the one allowed is a banable offense. How very Trek.

Checked my notifications to see this, I'm not even active in those communities.

The reason says ' Piefed Troll ' I'm not sure what that could be?

Can someone help me figure out why I was banned? I wasn't very active in the last week I can't imagine why I'd be banned, especially from these communities.

I posted this meme to the Lemmy Shitpost community. I reckoned that it might generate a bit of debate, and would probably end up locked, but the entire post got deleted, and moreover, I'm now forbidden from sharing political posts to the community. Political posts are not against the rules of the community.

I have reason to believe that the post was deleted not because it was controversial, but because the moderator (Decoy321) disagreed with the political slant of the meme. The reason I find this suspicious is because other controversial posts, such as one about veganism remains up, and Decoy321 seemed to enjoy the fact it was controversial:

cross-posted from: https://infosec.pub/post/42793761

Bloody backpack of Iranian girl killed in US-Israeli attack on Iranian elementary school

Source

Reposting here after the original post was removed from !pics@lemmy.world

The mod posted something from substack, and I asked if they had another source not from the Nazi platform and was banned for trolling.

tw: death, blood, gore, irony

a bit of context

I posted an ironically edited Charlie Kirk shot gif, with what I thought at the time was sufficient warning and blockage, in response to someone saying we could ai generate a gif of Hitler's suicide. I was making a comment on how such a thing couldn't compare. All things considered I didn't think my comment was in that poor taste, especially given I was actively editing to give even more warning and barriers. In the end it's not a big deal, I expect no less, but come on, give me more than "nope"

Edit:

I kind of regret making the post but the dialogue might make it worth it.

to be clear, I never thought they were powertripping and/or bastards, this was just the most appropriate community for something that at the time I felt could use more discussion.

Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7 Rule 7

There are 9 rule 7s here and 4 of them are obviously written by communists criticising liberals. Rule 7 is supposed to protect the community from libs but the biggest turbolib I see here is db0.

Fuck's sake this is worse than lemmy.ml

Context: a thread about what instance to reccomend.

Turns out talking about .ml users excusing Russian war crimes and Iranian crimes against humanity is not OK in c/asklemmy. Nor is mocking defederated Hexbears on alt accounts who literally admit to sealioning XD

Seems a tale older than FidoNet, we must remember we're one take a ModGod dislikes away from GOODBYE!

Rule 7 of !flippanarchy@lemmy.dbzer0.com is:

No shaming people for being anti-electoralism. This should be obvious from the above point but apparently we need to make it obvious to the turbolibs who can’t control themselves. You have the rest of lemmy to moralize.

I think a community with an ideology is a fine thing, and rules that prevent people with opposing ideologies from taking over the conversation are a good idea. FlipAnarchy's rules 3, 4, and 6 are well designed to accomplish this goal and I like them. And I've even taken a little inspiration from lemmy.dbzer0.com when I designed My instance's rule 2, which limits authoritarianism on the site, sometimes in a way that ruffles outsiders' jimmies - I once got a 2 day ban from .ca for reporting a screenshot of a post by someone named "princess". I was marking the post for later deletion because we don't want content from hereditary monarchist users, and the .ca admins didn't get it. My anarchism was a bit too radical for them to understand.

Anyway, FlipAnarchy rule 3 targets "right-wing" and "anarcho-capitalist" posts. Good, these are well-defined labels for ideological opponents to anarchism. Rule 4 targets "redfash", which is a lot looser, but fortunately comes with a well-reasoned explanation why tankies are not welcome. Rule 6 warns people who aren't "anarchist", and again we have some well designed rules here, very clear on who they're aimed at.

Rule 7 is a bit different. The tone of this rule is a lot angrier than the rest, and it being the last, it's easy to imagine that it was written in haste after the community mod became frustrated by posts that didn't break the rules, but weren't welcome. I think it's time to give this rule another pass to polish it up to the same spec as the other rules.

Sentence A of this rule is pretty clear, so far off to a good start.

Sentence B... is where it all goes wrong. It's saying no shaming people for anti-electoralism should be obvious based on rule 6, which says it's an anarchist community. But I'm an anarchist and I don't see how this rule is obvious. I think there's a lot of ongoing debate between anarchists about when voting is appropriate and necessary. Sentence B continues by calling everyone who breaks this rule a "turbolib".

Sentence C says "you have the rest of lemmy to moralize", but who is "you"? Is it the turbolibs? Are anarchists allowed to moralize on this community? Are they allowed to moralize if they disagree with db0's personal opinion?

This rule reads as angry, and defensive, and targeted at a particular idea of a rulebreaker in the moderator's head. What are the boundaries of the rule as they apply to people who don't fit this idea? Anarchists like Myself, who are not electoralist, but are pro-voting? Unclear until we see the rule in action.

So let's see the rule in action.

Removed Comment You've got to be kidding me. The fact that an anarchist sub moderated by a libertarian socialist has that rule is really shameful and embarrassing. by Guy Ingonito@reddthat.com
reason: Rule 7

This Guy doesn't look like a "turbolib" to Me, they look like a fellow anarchist annoyed by the way this rule appears to insult them.

Removed Comment "Dems never learn! That's why we need to withhold our vote to teach them a lesson!" by PugJesus@lemmy.world
reason: Rule 7

Okay, I know PugJesus, and he's no turbolib. He leans centrist on gender issues, but he's also done a lot to oppose redfash ideology on Lemmy and PieFed, he has a clear understanding of communist ideology and would seem to be exactly the sort this community should welcome.

Banned
TrickDacy
@lemmy.world
from the community Flippanarchy
reason: Too many rule 7 violations to deal with manually

TrickDacy moderates !fuck_ai@lemmy.world, a very radical community.

Removed Post Communists vs Tankies on voting
reason: Rule 7

Well surely a post that portrays communists and tankies as ideologically opposed must be anarchist! I refuse to believe the OP of this is a turbolib! (it Me)

I'm cherry-picking, to be sure. There are plenty of instances of this rule in action where the target was someone who I would be willing to agree is indeed a turbolib, even if I wouldn't personally use that wording. But this rule isn't just for them, it's also for anarchists who simply don't agree with db0 on the best way forward in our current political situation. And we've got Marx quotes to back us up and everything, if you really need to test our ideological purity.

So this rule should be changed in one of two ways: It should either be reworded to stop insulting anarchists and make it clear that this is a point the moderator is unwilling to compromise on, OR it should be revised to only target neoliberals, and allow us anarchists to speak freely on this debate.

Until one of those two changes is made, the rule is currently abusing moderator authority to present a personal opinion, controversial within the community, as the only truth of anarchism. And that's not very anarchist.