You may have noticed a distinct lack of return2ozma. This is due to their admitting, in a public comment, that their engagement here is in bad faith:
I’m sure there will be questions, let me see if I can address the most obvious ones:
- Can I still post negative stuff about Biden?
Absolutely! We have zero interest in running an echo chamber. However, if ALL you’re posting is negative, you may want to re-think your priorities. You get out of the world what you put into it and all that.
- Why now?
Presumption of innocence. It may be my own fault, but I do try to think the best of people, and even though they were posting negative articles, they weren’t necessarily WRONG. Biden’s poll numbers, particularly in minority demographics ARE in the shitter. They are starting to get better, but he still has a hell of a hill to climb.
- Why a 30 day temp ban and not a permanent ban?
The articles return2ozma shared weren’t bad, faked, or from some wing-nut bias site like “beforeitsnews.com”, they were legitimate articles from established and respected news agencies, pointing out the valid problems Biden faces.
The problem was ONLY posting the negatives, over and over and then openly admitting that dishonest enagement is their purpose.
Had they all been bullshit articles? It would not have taken anywhere near this much time to lay the ban and it would have been permanent.
30 days seems enough time for them to re-think their strategery and come back to engage honestly.
I haven’t had time to go back and review the chain you’re talking about, re-report it and I’ll grab it when I have the chance.
I can’t re-report it, they’re banned on blahaj and the comments have been purged for me. Also my client (maybe instance?) doesn’t allow re-reporting.
Got it, I’ll come back through the comment link when I have the chance!
Should I take that these comments are still up near 24 hours later with no follow up to mean that they don’t break any rules?
Starting from here:
https://lemmy.world/comment/10473647
Yeah, there’s nothing actionable there. The downvotes and replies do the job.
Guy is making a provably false argument, that’s proven to be false.
So to sum up:
Posting “too many” true but negative things about Biden - Bannable
Posting denials of specific, provable homophobic incidents and only interacting with posts about LGBT issues to do that specifically: somehow doesn’t violate the civility rule despite being homophobic or the rule on good faith interaction
Thanks for being honest about where your priorities lie.
There were two comment threads by the way, not sure if you looked at the other since you only mention one.
Happy Pride 🥳
Nothing in their comments is overtly homophobic. He’s arguing that someone didn’t say something they clearly said as a college student.
All of which is provably false as per the comments and downvotes.
Sorry, I didn’t mean to give the impression that I was open to debate over whether it’s homophobic to deny a politician spouting homophobia (when he literally admitted he did so) and deny that a pastor called LGBTQ+ movement demonic when there is video of it (did you even read the second link to this thread? You still seem to think there was only one thread). It is homophobic, full stop.
There is not a non-homophobic reason to go to multiple threads about LGBT people having bigotry aimed at them and to deny that it’s happening.
So if you could explain to me how homophobia doesn’t violate the rules I’d appreciate it.
What he’s engaging in, in the second link, is Christian apology, not overt homophobia. He’s not saying LGBTQ+ is the devil, he’s explaining why Christians might believe that.
Which is a whole OTHER deal:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_apologetics
Again, not actionable. If they were to come out and say themselves “I’m homophobic” or “gays are teh debbil” then, yeah, that would be removed.
But this whole “homophobia because it’s two steps removed”? Not so much.