I'm not going to name names here, because there's multiple places doing this and also I forgot what instance I saw it on, but I've noticed something disturbing with the automated repost bots. You know, those bots that copy whole Reddit communities over to Lemmy with tons of automated posts? I don't like them in general because when I reply to a post I like the OP to actually see my reply, but this issue is more ethical. It's the automated duplication of porn from Reddit to Lemmy.

Now, I know that these models have consented to their images being shared on the internet. However, in my own personal opinion, porn models should have some amount of control over the manner in which their image is shared on a public forum. In this case, the people posting their naked bodies do not have control over how the image is shared. They can't decide to delete it if they revoke consent later, and they can't report creepy comments on their pictures. In most cases, they probably don't even know what Lemmy is, and yet their images are getting search indexed and shared with people. There's no creative control over the distribution by the person whose body is in the picture. I consider that a form of non-consensual intimate media. I don't think these bots should be allowed to repost porn without asking the permission of the user who originally shared the media.

17 days ago, @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world banned @Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net from !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world for 2 weeks. The cited reason was Admitting to being a troll: "I'm an agent of chaos." lemmyshitpost does not have a rule against trolling, so even if this claim is true, there are still no grounds for a ban.

https://lemmy.ca/modlog?page=1&actionType=All&modId=729060&userId=391830

While we no longer have access to the thread in which this quote was allegedly said, the modlog would seem to indicate that it was related to this post, which shows a man complaining that he's never been privy to private conversations between girls and their fathers, and a dad mocking him in reply. The body furthermore elaborates in meme form that people are being misogynist in the comments.

Misogynists and other varieties of bigots often complain that the inclusion of women and minorities is political and divisive, and thus that we should not discuss feminism in polite company. Track_Shovel's meme is feminist, and FlyingSquid's problem with Track_Shovel appears to contain the same essence - that Track_Shovel's feminist posting is apparently intended to create conflict; the definition of trolling.

FlyingSquid's association between being an agent of chaos, and posting with intent to create offense, is an unfounded leap in logic. Chaos is actually an important religious concept, so influential that it forms one of the pillars of the morality system in Dungeons and Dragons, alongside Law, Good, and Evil. Back in the real world, various religions have painted chaos as either bad or good, depending on the values of the religion. Many religions describe chaos as a primordial force predating the gods' creation of the world. The Greeks venerated, or at least respected, the chaos goddess Eris. Discordianism, a cult originating in the 1960s, worships both Eris and the concept of chaos.

FlyingSquid has a history of mod abuse when the topic of religion is raised. In this post, FlyingSquid violates the rules of a community they themselves mod, concerning hate speech against religions. This ban fits into that pattern. Track_Shovel has the religious right to worship and to act on behalf of chaos, however they see it, as long as they do not harm anyone else. Their post to lemmyshitpost was not harmful, and was offensive only to misogynists. Supporting women's freedoms and safety is consistent with the values of Discordianism and other chaos-worshipping religions, and is not trolling. FlyingSquid's analysis of the situation as being intended to get a reaction out of misogynists, rather than as intended to affirm the safety of women, dismisses women's safety and silences feminist speech.

I've told this story on Lemmy a couple of times since being banned from Blahaj Zone, and I'll tell it again.

I once posted a meme to a Blahaj community I moderated in which someone named Obvious_Troll@hexbear.net was attacking a trans person. ~~It was a political meme, and I'll try to avoid saying what the political viewpoint was so that this thread doesn't get derailed~~. But as part of the meme, Obvious_Troll was being transphobic, and the reader was expected to agree that transphobia is bad and Obvious_Troll is... an obvious troll. The username wasn't actually important to the meme, I was just including a picture of a Lemmy comment and had to include a name, so I made one up.

Ada then messaged me to say that the post would be removed unless I redacted Obvious_Troll's name. Ada said that Obvious_Troll is a real, trans lemmy user, and I'm not to attack them. There is nobody on hexbear named Obvious_Troll, I made that username up.

Read bottom to top:

So Ada defended a fictional transphobic troll, deciding they were trans for some reason. The troll's username was not the point of the meme, the point was what they were saying. So I made up a nonsense username to support the point of the meme. I don't think anyone would choose the username Obvious_Troll unless they wanted to be seen as a troll. As near as I can tell, Ada defended Obvious_Troll because they were from Hexbear, and Ada seems to think every Hexbear user is trans. Even a made-up one who wants to be seen as a troll and who harasses trans people. Why did Ada hyperfocus on the instance name, and not notice that the username was ridiculous? I don't know. I don't understand it.

Blahaj is intended to be a safe space for trans people. And Ada's intention with asking for redaction of this fake made up name was, somehow, to protect a trans person. And that's good. But it's really weird that Ada thought the way to protect trans people, is by defending fictional transphobic trolls.

EDIT: So, the discussion got derailed not by politics as I expected, but by Ada claiming Obvious_Troll is a real person again. Here's the original post in which Obvious_Troll is being transphobic and the reader is supposed to agree that transphobia is bad:

(I will explain more about the drama surrounding Flying Squid if people don't already know about it)

The community /c/soulism@lemmy.blahaj.zone was removed by the instance admins two weeks ago. The community contained only memes and discussion of the ideas of soulism. There were no attacks against anyone. Here is the admin's explanation of the situation:

https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/9875313

Transcript:

ADA:
The post you linked to by MindTraveller is an active misrepresentation of events by them

Traveller and I are not “in agreement” about much of anything. Their politics are very far removed from mine

This is the text of the message I sent advising that I was shutting the group down.

After consideration, I’ve decided that non voters does not really fit the stated goals of blahaj zone. Your motives for creating it seem based on a personal vendetta, and whilst your views are genuine, nothing constructive comes from the community. All it does is create division, because its sole purpose is to target others, without really focusing on any progressive ideas or discussion of its own.

At the moment, it’s causing more harm than good to the overall community.

I’ll leave the community open, so that if you choose to set the community up on another instance, you will have the opportunity to direct them to the new location.

Given the post which you linked, (which I had not seen until now) I will be removing Traveller and the new community, because once more, the goal appears to be to create division

The goal of blahaj zone is not political. The goal is to allow trans people to have a space where they can exist on their own terms, without having to pretend to be someone they’re not. My own political views are closer to Links/LibertyHub than nonvoters or its ilk. Yet as long as there is no bigotry or gatekeeping, then trans people with politics at odds with my own are welcome. It’s why we have an “armed queers” community, despite my own strong distaste for gun culture.

It is communities/posters that exist primary to create division, without adding anything positive back, that have no place here.

This comment contains only one side of the discussion I had with Ada about Non-Voters and Soulism, here is the full context (top is newest, bottom is oldest):

Transcript:

ADA:
Hey there. After consideration, I’ve decided that non voters does not really fit the stated goals of blahaj zone. Your motives for creating it seem based on a personal vendetta, and whilst your views are genuine, nothing constructive comes from the community. All it does is create division, because its sole purpose is to target others, without really focusing on any progressive ideas or discussion of its own.

At the moment, it’s causing more harm than good to the overall community.

I’ll leave the community open, so that if you choose to set the community up on another instance, you will have the opportunity to direct them to the new location.

MINDTRAVELLER:
Thanks for letting me know. I don’t mind if nonvoters is gone. It served its purpose. The guy who was banning trans people and calling us liberals for not wanting to die is no longer in power. The Blahaj community is no longer divided. We achieved unity. And sure, some people are whining that they have to get along with others now, but the tide is against them. I’ll see if there’s a way to lock the community and prevent new posts. I want to keep the most recent post visible so in two months when the transphobes start whining about Kamala I can link that post and tell them “called it.”

MINDTRAVELLER:
There we go, all locked up. No new posts or comments.

MINDTRAVELLER:
Also, your mention of constructive politics gave me an idea. I want to create a soulist community on Blahaj. Something like https://www.reddit.com/r/Soulism101/. That place has been a ghost town since the APIcalypse, but the soulist movement has been going strong on Discord. It should have a place on Lemmy too. Plus, it would dramatically reduce the number of people mischaracterising soulism on the fediverse. The only attacks shall be against capitalism, the cisheteropatriarchy, the state, and reality.

ADA:
That sounds like a much better fit!

Non-Voters was completely locked up, and I made a post explaining the decision to close it, which both Ada and I agreed on, as you can see in this message log. In Ada's later public comment, she says the post was a misrepresentation of events. She said that she and I did not agree. However we can clearly see in this chatlog that when Ada told me the community was closing, I agreed to close it. And when I asked to open a new community not focused on any form of criticism of others users, she agreed too. If I had not agreed to do as Ada said and close the community, there would not be a post from me announcing the community's closure. So the idea that Ada and I did not agree to close the community is nonsense.

At the time that /c/soulism was removed from lemmy.blahaj.zone, I had in fact already been unbanned from /c/libertyhub by the community's mods. Ada cites division as the reason for the removal, but there was no division at this time, except between some Liberty Hub users and their own mods. Here is the log:

Transcript:

MINDTRAVELLER:
Hi, I’d like to appeal my ban on Liberty Hub. I never broke the rules, I only complained about LOC’s overly strict moderation style. I was banned with the reason “off topic”, which isn’t a rule.

KITTENZRULZ123:
I unbanned you however know that you have broken the rules, if you make me regret this act of leniency I will reban you.

At this time, the division between Non-Voters, myself, Liberty Hub, kittenzrulz, and linkopenschest had been resolved. Non-Voters had never been a community specifically designed to target Liberty Hub, and in fact linkopenschest and kittenzrulz both had posts on the community that engaged with the concept in good faith, and which I did not remove. They were never banned from the community, and they decided to reverse my ban from the community. So the three of us had been engaged in a good-faith disagreement from the start, minus one impulsive ban that was reversed, and we had already set our differences aside. I became an outright ally of Liberty Hub when they decided to relax their excessive bans, and they were exploring the possibility of treating me the same way.

Here is where I diverge from pure fact to analysis and speculation: Since division still existed between the users of Liberty Hub and the mod team, and the users perceived Ada as an ally of the mod team and of myself (because I was cooperating with everything Ada told me and getting along well with the LH mods), Ada panicked. The fact that I was getting along with everyone and making compromises was causing the conspiracy theorists to target Ada. So Ada manufactured a drama between her and myself to make it clear that she did not approve of me, even if I was agreeing to do everything she told me. The unity, compromise, and reconciliation was a bad look for Ada in the eyes of the tinfoil hat people. Ada chose to regain the tinfoil hats' favour by inventing a fake disagreement between herself and me. That's the reason /c/soulism was removed, despite hosting zero offensive content and never even having one of its posts or comments reported by anyone. Ada needed to conjure up a fight from nowhere to look good to the conspiracy people.