@nutomic@lemmy.ml, a site administrator of lemmy.ml, banned @soferman@lemmy.ml from !worldnews@lemmy.ml. The reason they gave is:
because of your hostile behaviour there. This is something I should have done long ago. The main reason I didnt is that I didnt want to give the impression that you were targeted because of our political disagreements. But the fact is that you are causing too much trouble.
The ban announcement can be found here.
soferman created a post about the question if their ban is justified in !asklemmy@lemmy.ml. They deleted it after I asked them to, because deletion hides the post from front pages but it’s still accessible for review.
I don’t know if the ban is justified because nutomic didn’t provide examples for the ban, just a link to another explanation, which linked back to the original explanation.
It seems that nutomic and soferman can’t agree on posts which soferman sees as communist propaganda (complete with useless fact checking websites, not providing any primary sources for their claims) and soferman is posting stuff which other people see as western/liberalist propaganda.
In my opinion, everyone should calm the fuck down, stop creating drama and instead provide some hard sources to back their claims. If you dispute a fact-checking website with another fact-checking website or a far-right source with a far-left source or vice versa, you’re not being unbiased, you’re doing the spiderman pointy-game.
deleted by creator
He wouldn’t stop he/she was warned enought times
Okay, link the warnings then.
This is the comment linking to Nutomic’s warning and then explanation for the ban: https://lemmy.ml/post/68454/comment/58527
Other instances of what I would consider gaslighting and/or arguing in bad faith:
https://lemmy.ml/post/67737/comment/57096
https://lemmy.ml/post/67740/comment/57195
personally the only problem I have with the ban is its timing, if soferman was banned because of bad faith arguements I would be ok with it, but they were banned because of this comment which I think isn’t reason enough to ban someone. soferman had already become much less hostile.
Which I already linked. Did you click the links in the comment?
… or they could just be dumb, uneducated or polemic in those instances. I think you don’t know what gaslighting is. It’s when you tell someone that what you or they said, heard or saw isn’t what actually happened. If you didn’t see it, you should watch the original movie and/or a theatric play. I understood the nuances of gaslighting way better afterwards; Gaslight is an exceptional piece of psychoeducational art.
In this instance we can read what happened, soferman doesn’t deny having made these claims and the comments aren’t edited, though, so I don’t really see gaslighting. I just see a kid who doesn’t nuance their opinion. Don’t attribute to malice what could equally be explained with stupidity. And keep in mind that everyone is stupid at least at some point in their lives.
deleted by creator
This sounds like a reasonable thing to do. Try to keep it as factual as possible and please don’t open the third thread about this drama.
deleted by creator
I hope you don’t open a new post for it, but post it as comment instead. Maybe just below your initial comment here. Or maybe in one of the other existing comment threads about this.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
that’s not deescalating things and irrelevant to the discussion.
deleted by creator
This thread right here is NOT in soferman’s defense. It’s a discussion about the ban, which, in my opinion, was unjustified. I specifically created a separate comment with my own opionion so that other people could add their own. I only put facts in the opening post, without bringing my own opinion in. If you think it’s a good idea to create even more drama to drive people away from Lemmy, feel free.
deleted by creator
I think the ban could’ve been justified if it had happened earlier, but I don’t see the point in banning them after everything had cooled down and soferman was behaving bettter. banning when everything is ok just makes more drama.
yeah, totally agree. I’d love to see some good discussions and arguements instead of drama and fighting. some users suggested that maybe the current system is broken when it comes to discussing politics. because if a comment triggers me, the easiest thing for me to do is attacking the comment and downvoting it, doesn’t make the best of discussions in my opinion. another user suggested a method called adversarial collabration. so when two users have different opinions, they are asked to collabrate and write a single comment or essay about it, together. I think if we implement it and have strict rules forbidding personal attacks, sarcasm, and hostility, we will see a much better exchange of ideas. people would have to explain their underlying values that shape their current view on the subject, why they trust a source and why they don’t trust some, why they think something is justified etc. we can have a community dedicated to this, and if the results turn out to be better than c/worldnews, we can implement it there. if we fail we won’t lose anything, but if we succeed we have fixed the problem with voicing different ideas on reddit like platforms.