72
We should all be boycotting politics@lemmy.world (infosec.pub)
submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by CubitOom@infosec.pub to c/yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com
54 comments fedilink hide all child comments

@jordanlund@lemmy.world just removed my post from !politics@lemmy.world because the linked article wasn't a "news" source.

The sidebar makes no mention of accepted news sources. And honestly, fuck that fascist nonsense. How the fuck can it be justified to remove posts from articles made by fucking non-profits?

I guess @jordanlund@lemmy.world is also saying that since they disagree with the premise of the article, it should be removed.

People need to be aware that !politics@lemmy.world should be avoided.

This is why I also posted the same thing to !usa@midwest.social

Trump is openly committing treason. He must be impeached and removed from office.

https://midwest.social/post/36857540

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] MourningDove@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago

He’s not wrong.

[-] nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca 1 points 22 hours ago

Is a mod thinking the premise of an article is wrong really legitimate grounds for removal? Besides, Trump "must" be removed to prevent further damage. That much is true. It's just also true that he absolutely won't be.

[-] MourningDove@lemmy.zip 1 points 22 hours ago

It’s not a news article. Regardless of the rest, it needed to be removed.

[-] TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone 73 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I dunno I'm kinda with them on this one.

It's not a news article and while it's not as clear as it could be, based on how many non-articles get posted then removed, it's a community for politics news articles only. There's other politics focused communities that allow non-news article posts.

For what it's worth, I agree with the premise, but I also think the impeachment process clearly isn't useful since he's already been impeached twice.

[-] ech@lemmy.ca 20 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

There's absolutely zero requirement for posts to be news in the sidebar, let alone a definition of what they consider "valid" news sources. In fact, everything there directly supports posts like this.

First line of the sidebar?

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Yup, certainly fits. Next to the rules.

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

"Article" is not a word solely for newsprint or journalism. If that's their intent, they need to say so and explicitly define what qualifies as "news" (problematic on its own, but for another discussion).

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.

Aside from the nebulous and subjective requirement for "quality", nothing here specifies "news only" either or disqualifies the OP post.

The rest of the rules just cover behavior and general tos. So, if anything, an original article discussing US politics in the "discuss US politics" community should be welcomed by any mod acting in good faith.

[-] btaf45@midwest.social 2 points 1 day ago

sidebar?

Look at this bullshit on the sidebar.

[ some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.]

This means: JL can and frequently does totally ignore his own rules and censors and bans people without any justification. Because you have an opinion that he does not like or is slightly to the right or left of his opinions or he is just too ignorant to understand what you are saying.

That means there are tons of unwritten rules on stuff he mods. It means he is just as bad if not worse than the worst mods on reddit are. There is no reason for anyone to post to anything this guy mods.

[-] MummysLittleBloodSlut@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 3 days ago

Well everyone knows Jordan Lund doesn't act in good faith, so you shouldn't go on !politics@lemmy.world expecting good faith moderation. If you want clear rules and fair leadership, make your own community.

/s

[-] InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world 16 points 3 days ago

Perhaps we need a tag for think tanks or opinion column articles? I can see why people think they are valuable to discourse tho i I personally don't like them (particularly when they pretend to be news or research). Maybe a separate comm?

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 12 points 3 days ago

it's a community for politics news articles only.

It's not, at least according to the sidebar.

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

No mention of news.

[-] mrdown@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago

Maybe he should rensme the community to politicalnews

[-] CubitOom@infosec.pub 6 points 3 days ago

  1. I also agree that impeachment wouldn't solve anything. It's not the point.

  2. Please enlighten me on what is a news source

[-] sudo@programming.dev 22 points 3 days ago

For 2. it would be a piece of journalism not a call to action. "Group X calls to impeach trump" is news. Posting group x's call to impeach directly is not. The (alleged) lack of the authors opinion is what matters.

Its a very subtle and pedantic difference IMO. FWIW Jordan has even more arbitrary definitions of what is news and what is a blog.

[-] CubitOom@infosec.pub 2 points 3 days ago

I thought news was supposed to be objective? Now I am only allowed to share things with people if someone else inserts their opinion into it?

Wouldn't it make more sense to just share the source of the thing that people are going to form opinions about? Especially when written as a actual article as defined by Merriam-Webster?

To me, this is thought policing and narrative control.

[-] sudo@programming.dev 9 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Yeah news is supposed to be objective and you were basically posting an opinion piece. Its a silly rule that every news thread has to be laundered through some "objective journalist institution" instead of just posting direct sources.

Jordan was definitely thought policing you though. He made it obvious when he argued against it while also banning it.

[-] InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

I thought news was supposed to be objective?

Really no news is ever objective. From your own posts about section certainly isn't here to be objective. To be clear it is a bias I agree with.

Our Mission

Free Speech For People works to renew our democracy and our United States Constitution for we the people. Founded on the day of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling, Free Speech For People envisions a democratic process in which all people have an equal voice and an equal vote. We advance this mission with the following innovative, effective, and complementary strategies:

  • We fight for the right to vote; for free and fair elections, for reliable and secure voting systems, and for the bedrock promise of political equality for all;
  • We draft and promote key constitutional amendments to restore our democracy by establishing a constitutional right to vote, majority rule (one person-one vote) in the election of the president and vice president, and a constitutionally-mandated public campaign finance system and strict limits on private political contributions and spending; eliminating the judicially fabricated doctrine of corporate constitutional rights; and implementing the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment; -We engage in legal advocacy in the courts to advance a new jurisprudence on money in politics and to confront the misuse of the U.S. Constitution to claim corporate exemptions from our laws;
  • We develop and advocate for model laws and other tools to challenge big money in politics and to make corporations responsible to the public; and We challenge corruption at the highest levels of our government and lead bold campaigns for accountability under the law.
[-] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 4 points 3 days ago

No system functions as intended when half of the people running it are acting in malice.

[-] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 2 points 3 days ago

both time its performative, they want to impeach to show them to be strong in the eyes of the voters, knowing agreed beforehand the senate wont convict, which was most likely instigated by MITCH mcconnel anyways.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] davidagain@lemmy.world 18 points 3 days ago

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents.

Your post is not a link to an article.

[-] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

But also jl is still allowed to moderate there, which caught my eye much worse and is more disturbing. I guess fair removal but also wtf they still have Lund? Is there an esh option?

[-] davidagain@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

I don't know who or what jl or lund or esh are, in afraid.

[-] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 days ago

Jl and Lund refer to the chief mod of .world, which needs to be defederated.

Esh refers to a term from a subreddit, 'everyone sucks here'

[-] davidagain@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Thanks for explaining.

[-] CubitOom@infosec.pub 6 points 3 days ago

What is an article? Is it something like this definition?

Why can't an argument written by a non-profit be an article?

If it has to come from a news corporation, which ones? Who gets to decide?

If the MAGA regime decides to label a news source as "fake" is it no longer trusted? What if the news corp is dissolved but the writers started something else?

[-] davidagain@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago

There's no sense trying to argue your case like I'm some kind of legal judge. It looked to me like you wrote a sentence of opinion and linked to a petition rather than link to an article. I assumed they meant news article. You didn't. The person who gets to decide is the moderator.

[-] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

It's jordan, power tripping, again, PTB of course.

For one, I agree with you, there is no rule that specifically clarifies that it must be a news article.

Like, if I had just directly posted the tweet where Trump publically declared Charlie Kirk as actually dead... well uh, that literally is news, but because its not from a journalism outlet, it probably wouldn't count... even though I am just faster at breaking that news, and the journalists will have their articles out within an hour or two.

Sometimes, news is 'breaking'.

Sometimes, news can be 'broken' by ... not a news outlet.

This is apparently lost on Jordan, or, he's too lazy or pretentious to bother writing more clear rules.

Anyway, beyond that, this is obviously ambiguous and vague and contentious as to what should and should not count as an article that can be posted in the comm...

... which means that enforcement of this rule is somewhat arbitrary.

So Jordan here then lists all his reasons why he thinks this thing people are organizing and calling for is dumb, and... that basically justifies the 'its not news' rule that is apparently being broken.

So, basically, Jordan censored because he didn't like what you posted, and then tried to wiggle that into some kind of a broken rule.

It is incredible to me that he has not been removed by the .world admins yet.

Personally disagreeing with a concept put forth by a group... doesn't make that group's announcement not news.

Removing something just because you personally don't agree with it... is literally the anti-thesis of free speech, an open conversation.

Finally:

... Did anyone else notice how he is referring to himself with the royal "we"?

... while we understand the sentiment ... [liberal-splaining impeachment proceedings]

Yeah that's right, Jordan is apparently a "we" now.

Petty Tyrant.

EDIT:

I am apparently getting a reply from someone who I've already blocked for being some kind of petulant hypocrite or persistent dumbass, so uh... I don't care what they have to say, whoever they are.

=D

[-] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago

This is apparently lost on Jordan, or, he’s too lazy or pretentious to bother writing more clear rules.

yeah strongly disagree.

I think he prefers the rules being vague so he can shitcan whatever he doesn't like. that's true pettiness.

[-] sudo@programming.dev 25 points 3 days ago

Basically everything jordanlund moderates is trash. Although this is not the most egregious example.

[-] btaf45@midwest.social 0 points 1 day ago

He falsely accused me of being "transphobic". Then censored me and when I called him out either banned me sitewide or caused me to be banned when I was closing in on 2000 lemmy submissions. Then I later read how JL went to a trans community and acted like a jerk to the people there. Incredible. I've never posted to a trans community but if I did I would be fully respectful of the people there.

I returned to reddit for awhile and made a post about it. So because JL didn't want a few people on a lemmy.world submission to read my reply to him, a much larger number of people on reddit have read my reply to him. And on reddit a lot of people don't understand the difference between lemmy and lemmy.world, so this guy has done lots of damage to lemmy's reputation.

https://www.reddit.com/r/redditalternatives2/comments/1n07owd/banned_from_lemmyworld_sitewide_for_agreeing_with/

[-] Bonus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

They said they removed Jordan Lund multiple times recently. Stop giving them oxygen. They don't deserve it.

That being said, this is objectively not from a reliable media source, correct? Whether something is an article or an op-ed is another subject for debate but this is a political mailer, not an article.

[-] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 2 days ago

No they specifically said they only removed him from the mod community group because reasons.

And bold to think JL knows the rules of any sub he mods

[-] CubitOom@infosec.pub 8 points 3 days ago

Show me in the rules where it says articles need to be news.

[-] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 2 days ago

Sadly it's only in jls mind

[-] mrdown@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago

Jordan again?

[-] njm1314@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago

It's always fucking Jordan I tell you.

[-] morphballganon@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago

Yeah I blocked it many moons ago

[-] CubitOom@infosec.pub 4 points 3 days ago

The problem I have is, this is the most popular political community. I've seen a lot of things get posted here by others only to be removed.

People need to be more aware of the issue so they simply stop posting there.

[-] Deceptichum@quokk.au 6 points 3 days ago

!politics@piefed.social is a good alternative.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] _cryptagion@anarchist.nexus 5 points 3 days ago

it's that time of week again, huh?

[-] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 2 days ago

Idk i figured admins would have told him to lay low for a bit. Then again also doesn't seem like they care so 🤷

[-] Doomsider@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

Don't make fun of our leriods or our lemenstraul cycles!

[-] _cryptagion@anarchist.nexus 3 points 3 days ago

to be clear, I meant he's in a YPTB thread once every week.

[-] Doomsider@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Yes, I was totally being silly.

[-] _cryptagion@anarchist.nexus 1 points 2 days ago

I know, I just wanted to cover my bases lol

[-] Triumph@fedia.io 4 points 3 days ago

Don’t tell me what to do.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2025
72 points (77.3% liked)

Ye Power Trippin' Bastards

1513 readers
104 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:

  1. Which mods/admins were being Power Tripping Bastards?
  2. What sanction did they impose (e.g. community ban, instance ban, removed comment)?
  3. Provide a screenshot of the relevant modlog entry (don’t de-obfuscate mod names).
  4. Provide a screenshot and explanation of the cause of the sanction (e.g. the post/comment that was removed, or got you banned).
  5. Explain why you think its unfair and how you would like the situation to be remedied.

Rules

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.

Relevant comms

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com
unruffled@anarchist.nexus