I was in an incident that led to people complaining about me here and by extension in Ask Lemmy, one which I explained my perspective on elsewhere. Then, when sharing my perspective, I was asked by a certain Blaze to share it in YPTB, only for those in charge there to give what amounted to a signal of disregard for it and to take it elsewhere. Going by their own words, I then shared it in [email protected] as the only close alternative available, which, as a part of their own ā€œrules subtextā€, sometimes allows this, and the person, if not all of those who help with YPTB, proceeded to drop by anyways and scold me because ā€œYTPB has specific posting guidelines in the sidebarā€.

The implication here is false, at least by my definition of the word ā€œfalseā€, and he even alluded to that after it began to be discussed elaborately, albeit before using an appeal to the masses (story of my life) and say ā€œmost people seem to understandā€, which ignores consensus of me and the aforementioned Blaze (as much as the ā€œthe truth we all wanted to speakā€ remark ignores not everyone had that issue). Notice how I responded with ā€œI can spot rules broken by the other personā€™s thread more easily than I can spot rules broken by mineā€ and got only thumbs down for it and no responses, yet when I actually dissected the rules piece by piece in front of him to point out that any rule I supposedly broke wasnā€™t there, which even the person who recommended I make the discussion in the first place (the aforementioned Blaze) agreed was a ā€œfair point to be honestā€, the mod then delved into the concept of ā€œunspoken rulesā€ as an excuse for himself and said he didnā€™t want to ā€œrules-lawyerā€, which not only disproves what he said about ā€œspecific posting guidelinesā€ being ā€œin the sidebarā€ that supposedly explained what I did wrong, but proved a point I commonly mention about people in different places including here always being uncritical and unwilling to see things for themselves and just taking peoplesā€™ word for things (and about that, to respond to Cypherā€™s last reply, intellectual =/= intelligent). A part of that is it also suggests, by extension, that the quantity of thumbs down you garner is unreliable as consistently meaning anything, unless the rule is actually to apply gladiator logic and say a thumbs down signals mercy, as indicated by the very Roman-esque culture around here. I guess all this time, I was being praised and didnā€™t realize it?

This idea of ā€œunspoken rulesā€ and ā€œreading between the linesā€ seems to be a common theme here because everyone seems to think that concept is valid, and they think that whether youā€™re akin to an outcast is defined by the norms you follow. This makes me curious to askā€¦ hypothetically, if I get all PTB gradings from everyone because I couldnā€™t read the ā€œunspoken rulesā€ or anticipate mod discretion, what if I were to go to the places I have authority over and ban everyone who says or has said anything positive or supportive about Luigi Mangione or what he did? Would I be able to accomplish this without being called a PTB? After all, that is how this all started, and again, that would be an ā€œunspoken ruleā€ on its own that can be chalked up to mod discretion, now wouldnā€™t it? Those are the terms.

I await your choice.

  • inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    Ā·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    Centuries ago Iā€™d be dead from the current dental infection Iā€™m dealing with.

    Youā€™re such a fucking chud I donā€™t even want to waste time with your dumbass.

    Most of the universal healthcare countries deny immigration to disabled people because they havenā€™t paid into their healthcare system via taxes.

    Iā€™m blocking your dumbass. Keep wondering why everybody hates you. Chud.